Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05 Final Draft General Plan 2045 Public CommentsCOUNTY OF HAWAI‘I DRAFT GENERAL PLAN 2045 Public Comments Received July 28 thru October 24, 2024 Table of Contents Page Website Comments (Konveio) 2 Public Workshops Questions and Comments 36 • North Kona, August 28, 2024 37 • South Hilo, August 29, 2024 43 • Online Webinar, September 5, 2024 46 Community Meetings Questions and Comments 70 • Kona CDP, September 17, 2024 71 • Kaʻū CDP, September 19, 2024 76 • South Kohala CDP, September 23, 2024 80 • North Kohala Advisory Group, October 1, 2024 86 • Puna CDP, October 3, 2024 92 • Hāmākua CDP, October 9, 2024 95 Public Comments Received via Email or Written 104 • Various Public Comments via Email 105 • Public Comments Received via Email with the same 75 Page Attachment 376 Website Comments (Konveio) Page 2 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Christian LaCuesta A second road in and out of Waikoloa is imperative for the safety of everyone here in the Village. It’s absurd that all this new development is happening without the proper infrastructure. Are we going to have to wait for people to die or families to be burning in their cars on the ridiculously tiny emergency access road before something gets done? I sure hope not. Please do something about this! 2 Estelle Birch Please build more roads in and out of Waikoloa Village. New housing is allowed with many new families, new roads should be required as well. Please do this now, we don't need another tragedy for Hawaii. Build the roads now! 2 `Jon Barlow When modern households and businesses are struggling to maintain operations that are energized...Why isn't there a Commission/Office of Energy? 2 John Pierce A number of proposals have been made as to adding another emergency road as a fire exit. While a good idea and maybe needed, I've always felt that we need far more than just another emergency exit that serves no other purpose than another fire escape route. It would be FAR better to extend Paniolo Road all the way to Kawaihae Road. I realize it would be three times more expensive, but I believe that the additional benefits are worth several times the added cost. What would these added benefits be? 1. A permanent secondary exit from Waikoloa Village. 2. Shorten the distance and time it takes to go to Waimea where emergency room services are located. This could save lives in emergencies. 3. The shorter distance would relieve traffic on Waikoloa Road and Upper Road for those heading to Waimea. 4. Shopping access is improved by having a shorter distance to Waimea. 5. This also gives us another fire exit that does not empty onto Queen Kaahumanu Hwy. 6. Having a second exit from Waikoloa Village would also relieve traffic at the Paniolo Road/Waikoloa intersection, plus the additional growth within the Village is going in that direction. 3 Amanda Hawaii County is unique in that it's people are all rural minded people. Mostly small land owners and small farmers live in the areas that this General Plan wants to limit and restrict. This General Plan is the open door for socialism / communism that restricts private property rights and reduces the ability to thrive and be self sufficient. The people of the Big Island of Hawaii love living here because it is not condensed like Honolulu and there is opportunity for expansion and growth outside of the urban city center. This Draft of the General Plan wasn't even written by those who live here. This is the cookie cutter General Plan that gets shopped around to every city and it does not tailor to us specifically. When more land is put into conservation and "protected" that means that an outside organization manages it and we the people lose access to those resources when constitutionally WE THE PEOPLE are the rightful owners and protectors of our lands and resources. We do not want to be condensed into Urban City Centers and not allowed to steward our own land in the areas outside of "Urban". The people who live on the Big Island would rather be country folk and not be corralled into one area that is controlled and not allow for expansion outside of the controlled area. 3 Amanda The way this is written suggests the acquisition of Agricultural Lands by the State to create a food source for all. This is exactly the type of language for a socialist / communist planned takeover of prime agriculture lands to be taken away from current property owners who steward their own land in the name of the greater good. This never works. Those who do not own the land will never love the land like the landowners do. The workers on these lands would not care for the land as the landowner would. The way it is written to put workforce housing on the land suggests that the plan is to create worker bees who live and die working on land that they do not own so that the government can benefit and control the food and prime agriculture lands. The agriculture industry and economy would be more successful if the product was produced by farmers who love the land and steward it themselves without government control and restrictions. 3 Page 3 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Amanda Any new tax such as a tax on miles driven should be voted on by the public. It is unconstitutional to amend a tax code to penalize anyone who is driving more than another without a vote. As the roads are paid for now, not everyone contributes the same amount of taxes that pays for these roads. Perhaps someone who travels a further distance is contributing to the economy more than one who does not work and stays home and therefore pays more of the share of taxes for use of the road? Should we not allow people to use the road at all unless they contribute a certain amount of taxes for the expense of maintaining the roads? That would be ridiculous and so is the tax on miles driven. It is un-equitable. It is not fair and it penalizes those who have specific needs to travel further distances. The Big Island is unique in that it is spread out and specific opportunities require a further distance to travel. 3 Amanda Instead of taking the generic General Plan that was shopped to Hawaii's Planning Department by an outside agency that does not live on the Big Island, this General Plan Draft should be written by those who live here and have internal knowledge of our way of life here and the desires of the people. This current draft does not create a vision for growth and expansion. It only hinders our way of life and is trying to confine all of the residents into a clustered area and strips our rights to steward the land and natural resources ourselves that are outside of the clustered allowance. I guarantee that the majority of those who live on the Big Island would rather have the ability to expand and grow and prosper and not live like confined worker bees in small spaces. The General Plan Draft should reflect that and have small private land owners who live on island be at the forefront of consideration for the benefits of this plan. 3 Luckytolivealoha1@gm ail.com Community Response: Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 4 Mellissa Anderle The 2045 General Plan relies on further implementation actions, such as zoning and budget ordinances, to move Hawai’I Island in the direction of stated goals. Priority projects need to be added to HDOT’s Regional Long-range Surface Transportation Plan (LRTP) to be eligible for federal and State highway funding. Projects established in the General Plan as a priority for the protection of community health and safety should be added to the LRTP to ensure their eligibility for State and federal transportation funding. The County should adopt a policy requiring that approval of new developments should be contingent upon the obligation of developers to contribute their prorata share towards infrastructure, especially with regards to access roads and wastewater treatment to ensure the safety of the community. 4 Amanda We do not need to spend tax money on mass surveillance and a camera on every street corner, which is where this leads. 4 Amanda Private catchment tanks on private lands should remain private and used as seen fit by the private land owners. The government should have no right to limit the use or infrastructure of the private catchment tanks that are intended for the use by the private land owner. Any regulation that takes away private property ownership rights to their own assets on their own land is socialism / communism in nature and that is not how we want to be governed or see our General Plan for our county. 4 Page 4 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Amanda Parents would like to keep our school aged children safe. It is careless to plan for schools to be the location of community public libraries and parks. This would allow catastrophic opportunities for child predators. Our children would not be safe if anyone from the public was allowed to come onto a school campus to use it for public use. We want our school campuses to be for school aged children only. It would be too costly to re-locate the current libraries and parks also. There is nothing wrong with having community public libraries and parks that are not in the same zone as a school! We want our General Plan to have our Keiki's best interests in mind and not follow the general cookie cutter plan that is being shopped around to every planning department in the world. Every community is not the same. We have different needs and this idea of making school campuses open to the public for the relocation of libraries and parks does not fit our specific community here on the Big Island. 4 Amanda The way this is written suggests the acquisition of Agricultural Lands by the State to create a food source for all. This is exactly the type of language for a socialist / communist planned takeover of prime agriculture lands to be taken away from current property owners who steward their own land in the name of the greater good. This never works. Those who do not own the land will never love the land like the landowners do. The workers on these lands would not care for the land as the landowner would. The way it is written to put workforce housing on the land suggests that the plan is to create worker bees who live and die working on land that they do not own so that the government can benefit and control the food and prime agriculture lands. The agriculture industry and economy would be more successful if the product was produced by farmers who love the land and steward it themselves without government control and restrictions. 4 Dave O Waikoloa Village could benefit greatly if water would be allowed to flow into natural rivers & gulches up from Waimea / Mauna Kea down into the village. The planting of trees, along these rivers & open dry grassy plains would help alleviate high winds & future extreme weather events in my opinion. 5 Dave O Kamakoa Skatepark would benefit greatly if a long & high fence was erected on the trade wind side. An attached wind break material to defend against dangerous wind gust & debris from entering the skatepark area during use would provide much needed safety to riders. Solar lights should be considered for use during evening conditions 7pm-9pm making for ideal temperatures to ride. Daylight use provides no shade. Dugouts similar to baseball fields should be considered for skatepark riders for shade safety. Kamakoa Skatepark is currently unfunded for phase 2 development, which should include an estimated 50,000 square feet of expansion. A street section & vertical section for beginner & advanced partipants is needed. Non profits & foundations are possibly available to collaborate with County on these suggestions for expansion & updates in my opinion. 5 Colin Keola Childs With electric bikes becoming affordable, and particularly with consideration of the too-steep-to-pedal slope gradients (for 90% of the adult population) and where people live, commute, play and shop in many parts of the islands, I suggest changing this definition to include battery powered/assisted bikes. Conscious planning attention to this new transportation factor could significantly improve urban infill planning in our sloped communities islandwide. 8 Colin Keola Childs This is a rigid definition that says affordable housing doesn't exist, isn't to be considered OR tabulated if it isn't the product of bureaucrat review and blessing. This would imply that ADUs (that presumably won't be crushed by being forced through a Chapter 11/OHD review and blessing) aren't envisioned to be "affordable;" is that true? Suggest this def be loosened up to be more inclusive and less authoritarian. 8 Colin Keola Childs The GP is not a proper place for a Zoning Code-level definition. At the GP level, there's no need to be this rigid. How are you going to reconcile the fact of Ag-Commercial operations that you are recommending for PC approval of a Special Permit application? Are you saying they don't exist as far as the GP is concerned? (E.G., the new "ag tourism/commerical manufacturing" facility in Puuanahulu, blessed via SP). 8 Colin Keola Childs "...and may include ag-commercial operations" (see above comment)8 Page 5 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Celena Lumanlan Antolin An additional roadway needs to be built going in and out of Waikoloa for daily usage. With the amount of homes currently there puts a strain on our daily commute..add in the new subdivisions they have started building and the proposed ones will be ridiculous. The last fire it took my family & I OVER an hour to get out of the village. This is bad!!! There needs to be an immediate solution before more homes are built and another tragedy like Maui happens. This should be top priority. Traffic light is another need along with a High School! Mahalo nui loa!! 8 Jeff Ag Based Commercial Ops also include roadside stands, food establishments and food hubs 8 Colin Keola Childs It would be more appropriate - and useful for planning purposes - to just say that cesspools are no longer permitted Statewide due to pollution concerns and are to be gradually replaced with improved systems in accordance with State law. 10 Colin Keola Childs It might be helpful to the average person to add a statement that the SMA, defined below), is a portion of the CZM area which encompasses the lower land elevations above the shorelines of the island of Hawaii. This gives relevant context to both definitions that most people don't "get." 11 Colin Keola Childs This is a good example of a simple definition that doesn't try to be a Zoning Code-level definition, as your current "affordable housing" def does. Here, you properly are avoiding saying that "Cottage Industries" have to comply with specific limitations of the Zoning Code and/or HRS 205-6 (SPs). 11 Colin Keola Childs While this def makes perfect sense as an SMA definition, because it embraces any type of artificial alteration of an existing condition, it's "over the top" here where I'm sure most if not all expect this to be changes that increase density/intensity of use. A definition of "REdevelopment" could embrace changes in use that result in essentially the same or lessened density/intensity of use. Much of this County's urban future will include REdevelopment of obsolete uses in existing urban areas, and which may often be a very positive thing that is distinct from INCREASED density/intensity. 12 Colin Keola Childs typo 12 Colin Keola Childs "...and because most endemic species in Hawaii have very limited survival defenses against predation, disease and overwhelming encroachment by exotic (foreign), invasive species." 12 `Jon Barlow An 'EcoIndustrial Park' is not limited to community/network of firms that exchange or make use of each others byproducts, but the general cooperation (kokua) of people/businesses benefiting from applying or the application of green, clean tech to save energy, thus deferring energy expense into saving which in turn enhance profitability of their operation/productivity using materials available natural, recycled (closed-loop) or otherwise which also has little, or no impact on environment and/or market; little or no carbon/toxic emission, reduce carbon footprint. 12 `Jon Barlow This term for 'Energy' must be changed to 'Power (Electric)' Producer...and all related reference to either 'power' or 'electricity' for basic definition of 'Energy' is that it's either 'potential' or 'kinetic'. FYI: Energy can neither be made (imported), or destroyed (exhausted) it only changes form. 12 `Jon Barlow Honestly, until we as a species that requires 'energies' to meet the demands of markets...can actually apply nuclear energy safely, and without impact of handling 'nuclear waste'. "Non-nuclear" is better. 12 Colin Keola Childs "...by achieving greater equity in enjoyment of public and private spaces by all."13 Page 6 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Colin Keola Childs All prior GPs defined FPs as being prepared at the agency level (the agency's plan to achieve its mission/purpose over the intermediate term, not the lower, agency-plan level for one or two programs). It has been ignored as such ( only fulfilled once to my knowledge, that being R&D's plan of several decades ago). An agency-level (not program level) FP would be the foundation of CIP and OP budget requests/approvals. An FP for a specific "plan", if not approved or budgeted by Council, is a "ho hum, no harm, ho foul" issue, vs. denial of a Council-approved FP for the agency that includes and ranks that plan/program among others in the agency's FP. 13 `Jon Barlow Delete 'Energy'- Sustainability Standard should be whatever it takes to operate, function to live...ideally that is green, clean and not impact to environment, people (social), ethical (lawful) and safe. 13 Colin Keola Childs Why is this defining of "Hosted" necessary at the GP level? It is an oblique way of blessing TARs in our policies? I believe it has become increasing evident that the impact distinctions between "hosted" and "non-hosted" TARs pale against the social impacts on our population in multiple ways. I suggest deleting this as a GP definition as being inappropriate and prejudicial for a "sustainability" document. 14 Colin Keola Childs This is incorrect as to how Impact Fees are legislated and imposed across the United States. There (and not here!), every single building in one or more use classes (usually just dwelling units) is assessed such fees according to a legislated table of cost impacts that were derived by an approved study that allocated infrastructure costs as "impacts" on a per-dwelling-unit basis. If this is what you're intending to promote, then make it clear it would apply to every dwelling unit, whether on existing lots (including ADUs) or new developments. Delete the words "project" and "developer" unless you are trying to cloak the existing Council practice of imposing "Fair Share Contributions" on rezonings (and only rezonings), which are a far cry from being "Impact Fees" as defined and used professionally and legislatively across the U.S. 14 Colin Keola Childs Why limit this def to "man-made?" Exposed bedrock in floodway/stream channels is mostly impervious to water in a practical, impact management sense. Recognizing this could be a useful aspect in giving flood channels proper consideration in comprehensive planning 14 Colin Keola Childs ADD: "...negative OR CONFLICTING..." Incompatibility isn't alway "negative" overall, just conflicting and negative only for the adjacent/proximal users. E.g., NIMBYs vs. affordable housing proposals. 14 Jeff If you define hosted, may want to add definition for unhosted 14 Colin Keola Childs "...in place OR are to be appropriately upgraded/improved." The latter condition will often be the case if the GP intentions are to be realized. 15 Colin Keola Childs These stated examples are not at all innovative, they're common across the U.S. Alternatives to traditional lumber/wood framing, such as embracing structural-grade bamboo timbers, WOULD be innovative. But not the construction processes listed here. 15 `Jon Barlow What about the new concept of 'printing' homes and there's sprayed 'ferro-cement or gunite'?15 `Jon Barlow Better factor in '(suspended) trains' to general plan of developing/promoting multimodal transportation for future 'masses' while there is time and space for implementation. 16 Page 7 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page `Jon Barlow 'Net Zero' is not only about the GHG, it also refers to reducing plastics, glass etc. going into landfills and ocean, and removing plastics, glass, etc. that already exists. It's called achieving Circularity or otherwise creating a Circular Economy. 16 Sara Steiner Geothermal is not renewable without constantly drilling wells. Wells fail and need to be worked on every several years. All the high-strength steel, all equipment and all working fluids, including Pentane are purchased from Ormat in Israel and sent over 2 oceans (8,800 miles) to Puna. Geothermal uses anti corrosion and scale chemicals and injects them into open wells where it ruins the water. This is not renewable just because the State of Hawaii says so!!! 18 Robinson Klarin The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 18 Colin Keola Childs Are you saying that RIL are referred to as such, or that all roads are? Perhaps you mean, "Typically, these RIL may be shown and labeled on government maps as "government road," "old government road" or "homestead road." 19 Colin Keola Childs and not established by the Planning Commissions??19 Colin Keola Childs Condominium, Timeshare, and Cooperative are all merely ownership terms, not building types or use types. Consider instead, "...in any type of structure [including tents] or on any parcel of land [rural campgrounds thus included], and held under any form of ownership regardless of the principal use classification of such structure or land." 20 Colin Keola Childs lot size is irrelevant to the term being defined. Delete.20 Colin Keola Childs I would like to see the Department present two examples, including cost spreadsheets and sources of funding of where this "can be efficiently and cost-effectively" done in 20-40 years. I'm betting any such example will include the assumption that the lot owners will agree to CFD (improvement district assessment) impositions added to their real property tax bills. 21 Page 8 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Colin Keola Childs Why not just say, "do not conflict with the GP LUPAG map"? That keeps it all "in-house" (even though the LUPAG necessarily takes LUD boundaries "into consideration.") 21 Nicholas Ing, DLNR: CWRM The Commission requires each owner or operator of a pumping well to report their monthly water use. These data are summarized in updates to the Water Resources Protection Plan available at http://dlnr.hawaii.gov/cwrm/planning/hiwaterplan/wrpp/ and will be used to evaluate the volume of pumping from active production wells in the adaptive management zone on a 12-month moving average basis. Furthermore, CWRM would like to expand the water audit program to include ways to address water losses and data validity challenges from the affected PWS. Act 169 affects different public water systems (PWS) which are not utilities and do not have customers in the traditional sense that a typical water utility does. We recommend participating in the Water Audit Program and updating your water usage data to further increase water efficiency in the water system. 22 Nancy Please make egress routes out of Waikoloa a top priority! Some folks have driven across the golf course with children in the car to evacuate. Our school children, our elderly and our families, the Waikōloa Plaza employees and shoppers all need to be able to exit the area safely when necessary. 25 Nhumey The purpose of the General Plan is to guide the pattern of future development in this County based on long-term goals. It should identify the visions, values, and priorities important to the people of this County. The General Plan includes overall themes, goals, principles, objectives, and policies, as well as implementation priorities and actions to carry out policies including, but not limited to, land use maps, programs, projects, regulatory measures, standards and principles, and interagency coordination. Community Response: The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 25 JamieBe Not only would adding emergency egress routes help residents evacuate, they would also help with fire management, allowing the county fire mitigation teams to get closer to fire line. Also seems a good idea to keep new route(s) open in general to ease traffic congestion and give more options for traffic flow for residents. 25 Page 9 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Colin Keola Childs As this sentence is written, it's an out of place "vision statement" and not a situational/factual statement. Further below in this paragraph, envisioning is correctly distinguished. To correct this sentence, I suggest rephrasing to something more like: "Hawaii Island CAN BE [w/o caps] a leader in ...." rather than asserting that it IS [now] a leader in such, which it clearly is not today. 26 Dara Wipp Community Response: The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Page 10 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Connie Monk Community Response: The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Gail Lozano Community Response: The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Page 11 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Codey Carpio Community Response: The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Michael Landers Community Response: The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Page 12 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Sean Landers Community Response: The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Winona T Adams Community Response: The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Page 13 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Jennifer Tanaka The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Andrea Fruggiero The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Page 14 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Tanya Klett The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Maureen Garry The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high-risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the wastewater treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Page 15 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Mona Peck The future of our Community here in Waikoloa Village needs to prioritize the Kamakoa Drive extension from Waikoloa Village down to the Queen Ka'ahumanu Drive as the NUMBER ONE PRIORITY. For those of us, who left our Village, those few short years go, we met very clogged roads out of the Village itself. As my husband and I traveled north on Queen Hwy., we watched as cars lined up on the Hulu exit road. There was so much trafic going north and south, that the cars remained in line and couldn't find a way into either lane of traffic. If the fire had spread into the Village itself, those people would have died, as other cars zipped by. Would could have been another Island, burnt to a crisp with thousands dead, while waiting to get out to the main road. To me, this is nothing short of criminal and beyond dangerous. Frankly, we can't until the time they have to do this project. 26 Mona Peck I also wanted to mention that considering the length it took for cars to safely exit Hulu, they need to upgrade it to contain 2 complete lanes that could be used. Another point to add would be the extending of Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road up to Waimea. We need MORE EXITS out of Waikoloa Village, plain and simple. It's amazing how many houses are now being built without the consideration of impact on roads or exiting from this Village. 26 Melinda Menchetti The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Elizabeth Williamson Having read the State/AG report on the devastation from the Lahaina fire, it is overwhelmingly clear that the fire prone areas of Hawaii get immediate attention from the State. I live in Waikoloa Village which is a high risk fire district. Our elected officials, Cindy Evans and James Hustace, by their own admission have done nothing to get a second road out of this community. In the history of the Village, we have had several fire evacuations already. If the bumper to bumper traffic on the one road during the last evacuation doesn't speak volumes, I don't know what does. The Village is growing rapidly, which makes the road out even more urgent. We have complained for years to our local officials the need for this second road and nothing ever happens. It is time for the state to step in and step up. Otherwise we will be the next Lahaina. 26 Page 16 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Kate Strickland We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 26 Ethierri Avati Food security should be the number one priority of any 'plan' implemented by any agency making decisions for all of us. The definition of 'sustainability' is OUR ABILITY to survive and maintain continuity independently. 26 James Hustace Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback to the General Plan. Your voice matters and this issue is very important to me. Since you mentioned me by name, I must note that I am not an elected official and have never held a elected role for public office. I hope to work with community members and with our County and State agencies to fund a second access road for Waikoloa Village. Mahalo nui. 26 Colin Keola Childs Containing growth geographically by tying it to "existing infrastructure" is not a sustainable practice, as to either the containment or the infrastructure aspects. First, almost all of our infrastructure is maxed out today (public facilities, utility lines and processing centers as for wastewater and stormwater, power generation facilities, etc.), so containing "growth" to existing areas of such is a non-sequitur. Second, contained growth is still growth, and I don't see where this Plan lays out (asserts) what the "sustainable" growth numbers are countywide if not supra-regionally, and how they arrived at such number estimate. Statistically projected growth, created by statisticians off of past population/commerical/ industrial growth trends has nothing to do with sustainability, any more than does a trendline for the imported number of plastic bottles. If the Plan can't foresee, state, and build its policies around estimated "sustainable" growth numbers approximated for East/West/North/South Hawaii island, how can it claim to be achieving "Sustainability?" Instead, I'm suggesting that the Plan present the County's idea of what volumes of population and visitor (two important, necessary distinctions) growth in our supra-regions is to be targeted as the upper limits of publicly supported/condoned growth in such island regions or supra-regions, and to state that such growth will be directed toward locations of EITHER existing infrastructure with remaining capacity OR where infrastructure can be economically enlarged or extended,and/or provided for use by all citizens (DEI) 27 Colin Keola Childs Can't we have graphic recognition of NON-native Hawaiian cultures that you are asserting that you're respecting, protecting and including throughout the narrative of this Plan? If you truly want buy-in, show a sampling of the ethnic groups who you want that from, which surely is not just the aboriginal bloodline. 27 Tawn Keeney Wholeheartedly agree with Colin's expression.27 Page 17 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Ethierri Avati We would like to know where we can find any documents, plans, projects or proposals that can show that a 'final draft' such as this one, made available to us, the 'general public', under the guise of inclusion seeking our input, has ever resulted in an actual revision or modification within the final instrument? Will anything we write, ask or suggest within this 'working copy' ever even be read, reviewed, discussed, considered and implemented? Or is this merely a formality to appease us by providing us with the 'illusion' that community collaboration is a part of the equation? Because thousands of us from around the World, locals, experts, professionals, activists, warriors, lawyers invested a significant amount of time and energy attempting to participate in the detrimental decisions being made by 'agencies' over in Lahaina to no avail. The local, state and governmental over reach has become a direct threat to all of us, tens of millions of dollars are allegedly being 'spent' on this island to address the housing crisis, homelessness, addiction and yet, none of us see where ANY of those millions are going except to building contractors who drag housing projects out for years?! We have no 'climate emergency' I just went back to 1949 and reviewed the last 75 years of climate data for Hilo. We are all about at our wits end. 27 Nana Kawasaki-Jones On Aug 21, 2021 Waikoloa residents were instructed to evacuate due to a quickly approaching wildfire. Cars were backed up on the main road as far as I could see while the traffic inched along painfully slow down the one road out of the Village. It was a terrifying, frustrating experience. A friend who works for the Florida Division of Emergency Management called to check on me because she had just attended a training highlighting Waikoloa Village as a case study in lacking community emergency mitigation. Waikoloa needs another fully paved emergency evacuation route for future safety of it's residents as soon as possible. I request that the Kamakoa Drive extension to Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway be the number one priority in the General Plan. 27 Matthew Chalker The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 28 Page 18 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Heidi Lang Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 28 Alethea Lai The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 28 Page 19 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Kendra Bruno The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 28 `Jon Barlow So does this mean the 'General Plan' doesn't include Hilo & Ka'u Districts? 29 `Jon Barlow Strange!? Accord to timeline; If Hawai'i statehood was in Aug. '59...How/why was there studies for General Plans initiated about '57? How could 'A Plan for Kona' be completed in '60, then for 'Metropolitan area of Hilo' was completed in '61? Barely 2yrs after statehood State Land Use Law was adopted...so apparently, most all plans for Hawai'i were drafted by foreign gov. (under occupation). 29 `Jon Barlow Confusing!! If there's no authority to change existing subdivisions or zoning...Why are there meetings to set long term goals/objectives? 29 `Jon Barlow Dept Planning & Economic Development didn't need to change to DBEDT, as tourism is reason why our economy is in dire straights. Did the name change after Oil Embargo lifted, in '74? 30 Mellissa Anderle Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 35 Page 20 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Tanya Klett Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 35 Alexandra Hustace The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. 35 Colin Keola Childs There are at least a dozen NGOs, most with financial support from either our State's DLNR/DOFAW or the Fed (e.g., Hakalau Forest Nat'l Wildlife Refuge) operating earnestly, regularly and aggressively "in the field" to restore and protect our native habitat in all regions of this island, and they should be acknowledged here (as a group). The "opportunity" arising from such is to (as another bullet point") to support dissemination of information about their efforts, volunteering, other contribution opportunities, etc. in essentially all regions of the County. From my personal participation, I know that many of these "on the ground" NGOs are constantly seeking volunteers in many activity areas and types. I believe few citizens are aware of the extent of protective and restorative NGO (and gov) operations on this lsland and for which help is being sought regularly. 40 Colin Keola Childs I suggest reframing this just a bit by terming it not the "shoreline", which is a line, but rather "shoreline corridor" which would have to be defined here or elsewhere in the Plan, e.g., as the coastal belt of land laying above the shoreline within the SMA but not exceeding a distance of (say) one-quarter mile from the shoreline within the SMA. Reasoning: the "shoreline" is less the issue than the convenient (reasonable) access thereto, by private or public transport, with key, high-demand ocean entry points (bays, harbors, surfspots, fishing spots) being "embraced" in such identified "shoreline corridor" ringing this island. 41 Colin Keola Childs Expand this: "Maintain and extend inland as appropriate for environmental protection and multi-generationally assured public shoreline access in the face of shoreline erosion and/or sea level rise" (because this plan is about our childrens' children) 42 Page 21 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Colin Keola Childs WHOA! You mean, despite all the environmental nurturing and public access reasons listed here, just because it's a commercial use now? Redevelopment? Please delete this! And let me guess: a residential shoreline condo has some ground floor commercial spaces, so the whole condo building/complex could be "redeveloped?" Sea level rise, coastal shoreline recession be "dammed?" Please, no. 42 Nicholas Ing, DLNR: CWRM The report notes that some buildings will adhere to LEED principles, will use water efficient fixtures, implement water efficient practices and use alternative resources where practicable. Please consider xeriscaping or native plantings and conservation landscaping to reduce water use and educate students about outdoor water conservation. Please also consider installing raingardens as another educational and aesthetic feature that will also help to retain storm water onsite and reduce runoff. 42 Nicholas Ing, DLNR: CWRM The Commission strongly encourages the implementation of water conservation measures, best management practices to mitigate storm water runoff, and the reuse of storm water and the use of other alternative non-potable sources where practicable. The Commission has published a Water Conservation Manual for State of Hawai‘i Facilities (2007 ) that lists conservation measures for restrooms and shower facilities; kitchens, cafeterias, and staff rooms; and landscaping. 44 `Jon Barlow Ocean Resources?? Might plans consider managing to extract ocean plastics & debris (North Pacific Garbage Patch) contributing to markets attempt to achieve 'Net Zero'. Aside the profitability of recycling the plastics & debris, is the preventative measures to protect, or rather safeguard dolphins, whales, turtles from entanglement or birds, fish from consuming particles. 44 Ann Should be Waiakahi'ula (there was a typo).49 James & Linda Williamson "I support the Michael Konowicz plan of increasing and/or improving connectivity throughout Waimea and Waikoloa and the broader North/South Kohala region." 52 Bill Shontell Why are some trees on our private property showing up here? Nobody has ever consulted with us regarding this. Is the interest in the trees specifically, or in the ambience of the general area (including the nearby gas station, grocery stores, and tow yard)? This item should be removed until a clear understanding is reached as to what the goal is with this line item. Mahalo! 52 `Jon Barlow Clarify: 'power' production based on conventional power generators and diesel electric generation results in emissions. Using electricity does not create emissions. 59 `Jon Barlow 'Power' production. Power and Energy are not the same.59 `Jon Barlow inefficiency of 'fuel' use, not energy.59 `Jon Barlow This is an improper reference to data. Hawai'i uses less electricity due to hospitable weather conditions that typically would not require power. It's due to overpriced cost for 'electricity'...as HEI has to pay shareholders a 'dividend' and consumers who are spoiled by HVAC; over use of Reefer/Fridge. 59 `Jon Barlow The entire section of 'Energy and Electricity' needs to be rewritten. 1st!! Section title should be 'Power and Electricity'. 59 Page 22 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Sara Steiner Puna Geothermal Venture was allowed to build in Puna on an active volcanic rift zone without a proper EIS. Now in 2024 they are providing an EIS without underground impacts because they say they don't need to disclose the harm because they already have the permits!!! 60 `Jon Barlow Cost of Modern Lifestyle. or Expense of Modernization, or even Cost for Creature Comforts would be better title.63 `Jon Barlow Man cannot produce 'energy' again "Energy cannot be made (produced), nor destroyed (exhausted)...it only changes form. 64 `Jon Barlow Challenging!? Hawai'i has a variety of energy sources to select from...it's merely a matter of using the proper technology to harness energy for whatever markets demand and only if HEI allows/approves. 64 `Jon Barlow Visitors Industry/Tourism is no longer a contributor to local economy, merely a factor for our existence. For wages can barely pay for modern living and lifestyle. Most all money/revenues generated is disbursed to out-of-state owners of hotels, fuel, materials, produce; visitors spend money on jets or cruise, tour services to get here. 64 `Jon Barlow Power Alternative LLC has various innovations to bring to market that will eliminate fuel expenditure; as well as various machines and equipment for manufacturing products/materials. It's a matter of acquiring the funds needed to finance change, and avert persecution by oil-based policy, corporate regulations and HEI. 64 Debra DiColli Nolen Commenting on climate change in relation to the risk of fires in Waikoloa Village. As a mom, teacher, and long time resident of our town it is quite clear we need an additional exit from our town as more homes are built and we have still one paved road out of our town. Our dry weather and high winds are such a dangerous combination. Our residents need to know in an emergency we have multiple exits to keep our families safe. 65 `Jon Barlow Tourism and visitors tend to be the problem as they trample coral reefs, harass marine life, collect natural souvenirs and disrupt sacred sites. 65 Nicholas Ing, DLNR: CWRM The Water Code recognizes the role of planning in the protection of water resource by outlining a comprehensive water resource planning program called the Hawaii Water Plan. The Hawaii Water Plan is made of up of five separate plans, which are meant to bridge land and water use development to understand the water impact of planned growth. The Hawaii Water Plan Framework helps guide the content and process for updating the five (5) components of the Hawaii Water Plan (HWP). Commission staff is currently updating this document to encourage a more holistic approach to water planning. Specifically, it aims to build on the unique cultural foundations and values of Native Hawaiians and ensure a more coordinated approach between the various water management agencies. This is being accomplished by utilizing a Hawaiian value set that forces stewards of the public trust to recognize water not as a commodity, but as an living part of the ecosystem that must thrive so that we may live. 66 Mellissa Anderle Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 73 Page 23 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Melinda Menchetti Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 73 Maureen Garry Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only one main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 74 Alethea Lai Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 74 Robyn Sandekian Strongly recommend that these data be updated to the most recent information available prior to finalization of this report. Housing expenses have increased significantly since the pandemic began in 2020, and the percentage of shelter-burdened individuals is likely significantly higher than it was previously. 76 Colin Keola Childs Because variances cannot legally be granted for character reasons under the current Zoning Code, I suggest this Objective be reworded to say something like: "Amend the Zoning and Subdivision Codes to better guide and support new developments toward maintaining desirable village/town character elements." The objective becomes a Code amendment to allow it happen. Also, consider reducing the minimum parcel area required for a PUD Permit from the current 2 acres (to perhaps one acre?) for developments that are primarily commercial under some density measure (such as minimum # of parking spaces for commercial being the highest minimum). This would better support infilling appropriate commercial uses with desired character-based exceptions being granted. 79 Colin Keola Childs Stating that Applications (not approvals) "should take into consideration view plane impact assessments" is not an Objective (as written); it's a wish. Instead, say something specific, e.g., "Discretionary permit applications for structures along public arterials (main thoroughfares) will include impact assessments of view plane and natural beauty impacts, if any." 79 Colin Keola Childs "Ensure" is too strong a word to be practical. It is not in the public interest to ensure compatibility with every surrounding use, particularly oddball, non-conforming uses and uses granted by Use or Special Permits; those should not be the standard for the future of any area or site. Expressly taken into consideration for such purposes, Yes. But "ensuring" such compatibility by mandating such in the GP will create some bizarre outcomes (in some cases, and those are the cases that will lean on this wording to win in court). 79 Page 24 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Colin Keola Childs "Encouraging" is hardly an Objective. The objective is to have the Director and Staff "encourage" this? Period? Instead, consider something like: "Develop and offer/provide financial incentives for large-scale developments to provide underground utilty services." E.g., deferring increasing tax assessment valuations on the LAND (only) area for perhaps 5(?) years following the tax year in which the development (or phase thereof) is granted final inspection on some percentage (50%?) of site building permits or occupancy permits as the case may be." THAT would be encouraging by actually facilitating it to happen. The deferred tax "take" on the included parcels would be minor vs. the community value of undergrounding. 79 Colin Keola Childs This objective is questionable as to both cost feasibilities for construction, routine maintenance, and wildfire impact management. As to the latter, such off-road locations are fire-prone in all but a very few desert conditions/locations in this County, and the impact of power loss from fire affects the entire island under our one- grid power/cabling system. Please consider narrowing down the scope of this objective to take these real-world problems into consideration. 79 Colin Keola Childs Develop, fund and implement a Program, not a Process, for this. The process exists, we just need to do it, and that requires a Council-approved program and budget allocation for the work to effect these reclassifications in a ranked order (preferably in a Council Resolution preceding the program budget request) 79 Colin Keola Childs Specifically add: "and public parking to accommodate our island residents visiting such areas." Kailua Village is the peerless example of this need, as Kona residents cannot outcompete the tourists for parking spaces to access the shoreline (fishing, watching) and wonderful nearshore waters. If this Plan is really about DEI, parking for all of us must be provided. And we're not taking a shuttle bus to and fro with our "stuff" from a private parking lot a mile and a half-hour wait/ride/crowd each way, as was offered us Kona folks last year. 79 Robinson Klarin Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 79 Colin Keola Childs One bold idea would be to create "PUD Districts" as a zoning overlay district that allows delineated sub-zone (w/in such PUD District) density transfers between/among such delineated sub-zones at specified density values/trades per sub-zone. It would be an opt-in mechanism, but it would provide the "vision" of what's wanted in that delineated PUD District area (e.g., 1 - 5 square miles for one District with sub-zones within that). Council established upon its approval of a PD proposal via the PC. Even though optional for landowners, it gives both the PD and the Council tremendous leverage in encouraging landowner participations in the TDR concept. 80 Colin Keola Childs Not a sentence.80 Colin Keola Childs Conflating concurrency standards compliance with a desire for less vehicle miles per corridor user doesn't make sense; two separate issues; transportation efficiency improvements and impact reductions may extend concurrency use limits, but efficiencies don't change what those limits are. 81 Colin Keola Childs "Clear guidance" (given by SHPD) is not possible; persons who have gone through SHPD AIS reviews for multiple sites with "historic features" know that each site presents unique combos of factors of which uniqueness is only one. SHPD, as an archaeological-based and trained regulator, will retain 100% right to "make the calls" on subject properties. Either the Counties are (someday) legislatively empowered to create local SHPD-type agencies with State-approved archaeologists, or the current M.O. will remain as is, unfortunately. 81 Page 25 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Colin Keola Childs Consider establishing threshold factors that would allow some to return to the Admin Permit type, and others with certain factors, go to the PCs. E.g., PUDs that do not reduce peripheral yards (setbacks) or increase building heights with a specified distance of peripheral boundaries, such as within twice the standard Code building setback, or reduce onsite parking requirements, could go administrative, while others would go to PCs... 81 Colin Keola Childs Rephrase to state that both new emerging industries and uses could be allowed through Use Permits (not only "emerging industries" and the Director granted the in-house power to make the call without a public hearing which a Use Permit would require. 81 Colin Keola Childs Not only is the grammar bad in the first clause, but the implications are murky as to what's intended here. Is this to be tool to discount vehicle traffic loads by saying, "Oh, they''ll probably be riding buses and bikes in the future so this development is not as bad as it looks!" ??? Please clarify how the "alternative" factors would be applied to alter the current TIAR conclusions. 81 Matthew Chalker Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 81 Nicholas Ing, DLNR: CWRM The Commission strongly encourages the use of xeriscaping or drought-tolerant plantings, the incorporation of low impact design features, and the use of water efficient fixtures throughout the development. We recommend onsite reclamation and reuse where appropriate. 81 Kate Strickland Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 81 Kendra Bruno Community Response: Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 81 Colin Keola Childs Not only "science-based," but also based on social needs, including lateral shoreline access that can move inland with sea level changes. 82 Page 26 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Colin Keola Childs The meaning of "subject to" here could be made more clear for the average citizen; E.G., "... and all mapped uses will be subject to the rights and limitations of existing zoning and existing State Land Use District classifications, while serving as a guide for future growth and preservation decisions by both the State and the County of Hawaii." 83 Anonymous What does this mean? Where in this document does it actually state the authority of the GPLUM? Per 2005 GP "Zoning requests shall be reviewed with respect to General Plan designation, district goals, regional plans...." this seems to make the whole purpose of have a FLUM moot? 83 Colin Keola Childs Suggest revising this to include only the core areas of TODs, or "high density components of TODs." TODs incorporate High, Medium and Low densities and arguably "Special Districts" designated as a component of a TOD, High Density designations would apply to only the central core area of a TOD per a TOD's inherent definition and design and could apply to particular "Special District" components thereof. Medium Density could occur within such TOD core or as a transitional density beyond the core area and in particular Special Districts. 84 Colin Keola Childs Suggest amending the definition to state that LI may include small-scale "heavy industrial" type uses in cases found to have little or no potential to impact residential and commercial uses. "Small-scale" would be a key element, and would be the Director's discretion in interpretation of all factors. Making this compromise inclusion facilitates our making space for small industries that can fit in this way, without their being forced to find a "Heavy Industrial" designated site of appropriate (small) size. This also furthers the economic diversification goal of the GP. 84 Colin Keola Childs One dwelling unit per 11,000 sq. ft. (4/acre) is definitely, incontrovertibly, NOT RURAL by any national or state convention of terminology. It is suburban, not rural. Half-acre residential parcels are not either, when comprising complete subdivisions, e.g., "`Iolani" subdivision transected by the top half of Lako St. in Kona is an upscale subdivision of half-acre lots zoned for half-acre size and within the State's "Rural" Land Use District. No one could reasonably call that development "Rural." Nor could they call Kona Palisades, Kailua View Estates, Kona Coastview subdivisions (2.5 - 3.5 units/acre). So going up to 4/acre would be totally bizarre for Rural. In a CPD or PUD where that density pertains only to a cluster of such within by expansive open space, yes. Otherwise, this classification should allow for 2/units per acre maximum density (as is the existing case) and that density only in cases where surrounded by larger, use-ensured agriculture and open space. 84 Colin Keola Childs Consider adding a policy for street slope/gradient design for residential developments, e.g., that collector streets should be designed to minimize the street gradient to the maximum extent possible to facilitate pedestrian and bicycle uses by residents. 87 Colin Keola Childs Sentence needs a noun or two after "higher" e.g., "higher capacity streets or highways..."88 Colin Keola Childs So, is providing "jobs" in a rural area, and for a facility that will axiomatically be adding traffic in such rural areas (delivery trucks, passenger vans, cars), a "clear community benefit" and "consistent w/ sustainability objectives" because young adult residents can have a service sector or laborer job? If those factors are enabled for approving a rural retreat resort by this policy, then it's just window dressing. If not enabled by this policy, limitations should be stated more clearly for use by Planning Commissioners and future Directors and staff. As written, it's really carte blanche when the pencil hits the paper to justify almost anything. 89 Colin Keola Childs How does adding visitor accommodations PRESERVE rural character and lifestyles? This policy is explicitly to change that, by adding a very different social element to the area, including more "outsiders" road traffic in rural areas. This should be deleted or toned way down. 98 Colin Keola Childs This is gobbledegook. What exactly would the flexibilities be that preserve health and safety in areas without pertinent infrastructure? 98 Page 27 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Jim McMahon Recommend against this action because it would be very difficult to enforce and therefore subject to abuse. There are already many "intentional communities" on Ag parcels populated by both long term inhabitants engaged in non- Ag. employment located outside of the parcel and by short term transient visitors. The planning dept. appears to have limited means to regulate these communities as most of the violations fall under the building code. However, the Building Dept. doesn't appear to be enforcing the building code or the occupancy rules. So I believe this issue needs to be addressed first. Secondly, in my opinion, the existing Additional Farm Dwelling Agreement (AFDA) process is a better way of providing additional farm worker housing with the constraint that all work must be performed on the same parcel. Without this constraint and the existing AFDA constraints we will see many more of these unpermitted residential communities on Ag. parcels. In my specific case I have one such community on an adjacent parcel. Access to this parcel is via an easement that bisects my parcel and have negatively impacted our farm. 101 CLINOSTIGMA@YAHOO .COM This appears ripe for abuse. Who owns the ag worker housing parcel that is not part of the farm? Is it the worker? What if he or she ends their employment at the related farm? Can he or she sell it to a non-farm worker? If not, will he or she find that this regulation thwarts their ability to build equity in their property? What enforcement tool ensures that this farm worker dwelling does not turn into residential use that is unrelated to farming? If the ag housing is owned by the specified farm, what enforcement tool will ensure that it is used properly in support of farm worker needs and not as tourist lodging? 101 CLINOSTIGMA@YAHOO .COM Amend to add "forestry establishment programs." The plan needs to recognize that preservation of existing forest is not the only forestry paradigm. Establishment of new forest is a valuable endeavor, which may include native vegetation, canoe plants, and non-invasive nonnative flora. 101 Colin Keola Childs In the context of the current zoning code, couldn't these two operations be added to the definition of "ag processing facilities, minor" by a simple code amendment (that includes giving some definition - especially of "incubator," or scope determination rights to the Director as to scale of operation?) 101 Colin Keola Childs I don't see why the Code has to be amended to do this (although it would be helpful to articulate this as an option that is already being exercised), because the County PD is already permitting farm worker housing (in addition to the basic, first farm dwelling) on remote-from-farm ag parcels, via the existing "Additional Farm Dwelling Agreement" with a few tweaks, e.g., retitling it without the word "Additional", specifying the number of dwelling units being allowed along with the legal description of the remote-farm parcel being attached as an "Exhibit" to this legal, official, recorded document, and which recorded document (the Agreement) "encumbers" (binds BOTH the housing site parcel and the remote-farm parcel to compliance. The enforcement issue can be handled with Code language a bit later, if necessary, that somewhat mirrors the mechanisms in the STVR/TAR (vacation rental) regulations, and the RPT Rule for ag dedications, both now pending (e.g., annual reporting/verification protocols which could do a better job of taking advantage of tax assessor site visits/reports as part of the PD's enforcement protocols). Otherwise, the current "complaint-driven" process will "hold the fort" for a few years. 101 Colin Keola Childs From a practical and workload standpoint for inspectors and support staff, it may be sufficient to make this biennial (every two years), and perhaps stagger the first of the biennial years among the nine TMK zones (e.g., on an odd-even number basis that puts Ka'u among a group of five zones,as the count in that district will be relative low compared to most others, so the workload is evened out. 101 Katherine Pomeroy This is a good idea. The CoH definition of "ag" and "farm" should expand from the plantation era economy definition to include modern allied food production income streams such as long and short term rentals, ag toursim, and health and wellness activities. 101 Katherine Pomeroy What is the purpose of this annual reporting?101 Page 28 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page CLINOSTIGMA@YAHOO .COM add "... well-managed rangelands and forests." The existing language suggests that only rangelands provide ecological services. Forests do also by protecting pollinator habitat, thwarting soil erosion and stream degradation, sequestering carbon, and possibly enhancing rainfall in what may become a drier climate for our island. 102 Colin Keola Childs A good way to frame this creation of ag-buffer standards and guidelines would be to draft them based on a vision of ag-productive uses of lands surrounding the idealized "Smart Growth" notions of TODs and TNDs on this island. Rather than just approving TOD/TNDs (if when it ever happens, due to questionable economic feasibility for developers to do so) with "open space" zoning or encumbrances surrounding the urban nodes, develop these standards as to exactly the range of ag uses, and ag activity/facility (by type or class of such) distances from urban boundaries are to be necessary. E.g, should it be OK or desirable to have, say 3 or 5 acre "ag parks" (like the State ag park of 5 acre lots at Keahole-Kona) ringing at least parts of the TOD/TND urban areas? Should there be a minimum width "greenbelt" of some specified maintenance standard for such greenbeltings, which incorporate factors such as overhead utility power lines, wildfire-prone plant controls, and greenbelt activity noise/traffic (e.g., recreational corridors)? With such a TOD/TND set of standards/guidelines established, some or all can easily be applied as the general oounty standard for ag buffer areas via subdivision/PUD and Plan Approval permitting regimes. 102 Colin Keola Childs Or instead: "Work with the State DOA, NRCS, and local farming, floral, ranching, apiary and other such citizen groups to form a County-sponsored 'Hawaii Island Agriculture Industry Council' (just a conceptual name suggestion) that collaboratively advises County agencies (PD and R&D at a minimum) as to X, Y and Z, etc. that support individual and collective ag industry sectors in sustainable, environmentally and socially resilient economic production of agricultural products." 102 Colin Keola Childs They are already able to do this and are doing so; it's a matter of scale, as well as national economics (e.g., currently local beef cattle "wean-offs" are worth about as much as local mature beef cattle due to demand for such to be flown/shipped to the continental U.S. for beef production THERE). So, it's not "enabling;" it's manipulating the economics of off-island demand for immature beef cattle vs.economics of local slaughter, processing and distribution/marketing according to consumer acceptance of the local beef qualities, and individuating that product marketing to outlets where residents most open to local beef (vs. mainland "choice" grade beef) can be best reached by retailers. 102 Colin Keola Childs And also takes topographic slope gradients into account between primary urban destinations of all types (commercial, sports facilities, etc.) and targeted residential areas (existing and/or planned infill or expansion areas). We can't afford to be establishing dedicated bike lanes on 15-16% pavement slopes as we have done on several mauka-makai collector streets in North Kona, when that money could be usefully spent on 1-5% slope gradient streets (existing and future per the planning model presented here) 106 Jennifer Tanaka Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 106 Colin Keola Childs Add: "Limit surburban and urban upzoning approvals to predetermined urban infill and growth areas in order to create economically feasible transportation linkages for all its modern forms as identified above. Upzoning approval for rural density designations should follow explicit finding that the rural neighborhood or community will have transportation mode linkages meeting the objectives of this Plan." 108 Page 29 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Alexandra Hustace Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 108 Rich There are many mauka makai trails that are supposed to be preserved but the county doesn't do anything to provide the public access. A great example is the Judd trail which starts on Alii Drive by the new housing development being built and goes all the way up and over Hualalai. What a great resource for the community. Why wouldn't the county require the developer of the property adjacent to this trail to restore that section? Why doesn't the county hire a surveyor to identify and open up the trail access? And BIKE PATHS are needed ASAP! 110 Ketty Loeb This section should include policies/actions to prepare mass transit planning for the impacts of climate change and sea level rise. 113 Brittany Isaac The county has to be negligent in failing to provide a second road out of Waikoloa VIllage. This would NEVER be approved with a community of this soze for ONE road out if this community was proposed now. We are expected to grow by over 50% in population and are the #1 fire risk in the state. The Kamakakoa road needs to be prioritized NOW. Waikoloa faces several wood fires a year, and has been regularly evacuated. It takes many hours to evacuate the town. It is critical to prioritize a second road on safety issues alone. This is literally life and death. The school is all the way North of the village and furthest from the only road out. The LIVES of the many who reside in Waikoloa need to be considered. This project has been overdue for over 20 years. 115 Patricia Cassel I have been a resident of Waikoloa Village for 15 years. I have seen our fairly sleepy little Village expand in many ways and welcome the new families that now call Waikoloa home. But our infrastructure, particularly roadways, has not kept up with our growth. I have seen wildfires come within "throwing distance" of the Village, and taken photos from my driveway of lava flowing down the slopes of Mauna Loa. It took nearly an hour for some in my immediate neighborhood to reach Waikoloa Road in the latest evacuation event. And that was before all the new housing developments that are being built now at both ends of the Village. Our only "evacuation road" is a one lane, steep pathway that could become unusable if one vehicle broke down, and dangerous if smoke and darkness were factors. Please identify and include needed multiple roadways in the General Plan maps to improve connectivity and safety in the area. We need multiple roads in/out of Waikoloa, including a connector down to Queen Ka'ahumanu Hwy from the North end of the Village. We need Paniolo Avenue (Hwy 196) to be extended to Kawaihae. We need our Hulu Emergency road to be made a permanent 2-lane roadway so that it is a safe and viable exit from our Village, which currently has only Waikoloa Road (Hwy 191) as an exit. We are an ever expanding cul-de- sac at the moment. Thank you for adding desperately needed specific roadways to General Plan maps. 117 CLINOSTIGMA@YAHOO .COM Where feasible, add periodic passing lanes on roads such as Hwy 19 along Hamakua Coast, as an example. Not suggesting these roads should be 4-lane, but Hwy 19 carries substantial commuter and work traffic in a single lane in each direction. The slowest driver sets the pace for all others; this leads to impatience and drivers dangerously attempting to overtake slower vehicles. 118 Jason Armstrong Why are motorcycles excluded from this effort? We motorcyclists are indeed among the "most vulnerable roadway users" and also among the "greenest modes of travel." Failure to include motorcyclists is an egregious oversight that, if not corrected in the final document adopted as law, will contribute to motorcycling hazards. Kind of ironic for a multi-year effort aimed in part at improving safety for users of the Big Island's deadly roads! 120 Ketty Loeb This section should also discuss how the County will include data/considerations of Climate Change impacts on public utilities, and measures to include these considerations into the plan. 124 Page 30 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Katherine Pomeroy Are the DWS Water Use and Master Plan available to the public? If so, how do we get a copy of it?128 Heidi Lang Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka’ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. 131 Nicholas Ing, DLNR: CWRM The Commission supports the use of alternative resources wherever practicable to conserve natural supplies. It is the policy of the Water Commission to promote the viable and appropriate reuse of reclaimed water insofar as it does not compromise beneficial uses of existing water resources. 132 Nicholas Ing, DLNR: CWRM Water Use Development Plans are integral to formulating water usage across different Counties. General Plans and other development plans help County systems and purveyors to plan for future water needs. 132 Georjean Adams add "wastewater" and stormwater management.133 Georjean Adams This section needs to discuss the serious coastal water quality impacts from inadequately treated wastewater coming from not only cesspools and NPDES permitted treatment plants, but also the evolving concerns over "functionally equivalent" discharges to coastal waters. The General Plan and County codes must be updated as this regulatory issue matures. 136 Georjean Adams add and "the coastal waters ecosystem"137 Ketty Loeb This section should also discuss how these various actions will take Sea Level Rise/ Climate change impacts into account (such as salt water inundation into/ erosion of water infrastructure) 138 Georjean Adams add "and fires"141 Ketty Loeb How are these plans taking into account climate change impacts? How will this new infrastructure be protected? 144 Georjean Adams Sustainability should include promoting and encouraging energy use reduction via using more energy efficient technologies and strategies (eg full loads of laundry, carpooling), It's not all about using more and cheaper energy. 146 Ketty Loeb How will these investments be protected from climate change? 149 Page 31 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Georjean Adams "...there are inadequate [or limited] programs for recoverable materials." There are programs for HI5, glass, corrugated cardboard, scrap metal, green waste, etc. in the County. 153 Georjean Adams "current economic model" means what? There are many reasons source reduction is challenging - tourism, lack of reuse infrastructure, lack of product manufacturing base, lack of education, little national/international market influence (certainly as a county), politics, etc. 153 Georjean Adams ".., including providing spaces for communities to meet physically and virtually."154 Georjean Adams "...processing for product/materials recovery and reuse,..."154 Ketty Loeb Include plans to protect these facilities from climate change impacts. 155 Georjean Adams "...sirens are understood and communication methods and coverage are..."158 Georjean Adams communications and response times 158 Robyn Sandekian Explicitly prioritize the Kamakoa Drive extension from Waikoloa Village down to Queen K highway as the #1 critical emergency access route needed for South Kohala in this plan. Seven new roads are shown in this plan, but there is no explicit prioritization and likely not enough funding to implement the majority of the proposed road improvements. Plan should include a prioritized list of hazard mitigation projects. 158 James Hustace Identify and prioritize specific corridors for communities. Rank these access roads for each district. Seek funding to complete environmental and cultural analyses. 159 James Hustace Improvements to these evacuations routes should also be considered. Pullover lanes, temporary lights during night events, keys for gates are available. 159 James Hustace Example secondary access routes to prioritize: Kamakoa Drive in South Kohala Pratt Road in North Kohala 159 Georjean Adams "According to the ..., the WHSL....161 Georjean Adams distributed sites 162 Page 32 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Georjean Adams 33.b. Work with the State to develop...." not something county can do re Corp Counsel 163 Ketty Loeb Create Climate Action Plans for UH; County school systems. 166 Ketty Loeb Develop climate action and adaptation plans for public parks and other facilities 169 Ketty Loeb Climate change impacts to human health and well being should be highlighted here, and actions developed. 176 Ketty Loeb Ensure new housing development is not located in coastal or inland flooding areas; and prioritize development outside of the Sea Level Rise exposure area. 182 Mary Mowdy We need a zoning category that would allow for a multi-dwelling ohana (not just 2 dwellings). A mini/modern-day ahupua'a or ohana co-op, if you will, where each family unit within an ohana can have their own permitted dwelling, water meter, electricity, separate septic, and most importantly, separate legal deed so that each family has a legal exit strategy if needed. Sale of that family's parcel could be bought by the ahupua'a (co-op) and held until such time a new buyer wishes to purchase that parcel. 2.5 to 5 acres of currently unused ag land (or unused urban land) could support 5 families and allow space for growing food, an ohana gathering space, space for children to play. This concept would encourage aging in place for the kupuna, possibly ohana childcare and other kinds of intra- family support eased by the proximity of the dwellings (no driving required.) This ohana co-op could have an open but roofed central gathering place covered with solar panels to supply each house with electricity and guttering on each dwelling to catch rainwater for gardens and trees if needed. Safe place for children to play, ease of gathering, reduction in need for social services, easy access to each house, with necessary infrastructure in place to properly support this endeavor. This also reduces some of the planned warehousing of people that it appears some of document's plans are indicating. 183 Tanya Klett The 2045 General Plan relies on further implementation actions, such as zoning and budget ordinances, to move Hawai’I Island in the direction of stated goals. Priority projects need to be added to HDOT’s Regional Long-range Surface Transportation Plan (LRTP) to be eligible for federal and State highway funding. Projects established in the General Plan as a priority for the protection of community health and safety should be added to the LRTP to ensure their eligibility for State and federal transportation funding. The County should adopt a policy requiring that approval of new developments should be contingent upon the obligation of developers to contribute their prorata share towards infrastructure, especially with regards to access roads and wastewater treatment to ensure the safety of the community. 214 Matthew Chalker The 2045 General Plan relies on further implementation actions, such as zoning and budget ordinances, to move Hawai’I Island in the direction of stated goals. Priority projects need to be added to HDOT’s Regional Long-range Surface Transportation Plan (LRTP) to be eligible for federal and State highway funding. Projects established in the General Plan as a priority for the protection of community health and safety should be added to the LRTP to ensure their eligibility for State and federal transportation funding. The County should adopt a policy requiring that approval of new developments should be contingent upon the obligation of developers to contribute their prorata share towards infrastructure, especially with regards to access roads and wastewater treatment to ensure the safety of the community. 215 Page 33 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Maureen Garry The 2045 General Plan relies on further implementation actions, such as zoning and budget ordinances, to move Hawai’i Island in the direction of stated goals. Priority projects need to be added to HDOT’s Regional Long-range Surface Transportation Plan (LRTP) to be eligible for federal and State highway funding. Projects established in the General Plan as a priority for the protection of community health and safety should be added to the LRTP to ensure their eligibility for State and federal transportation funding. The County should adopt a policy requiring that approval of new developments should be contingent upon the obligation of developers to contribute their pro rata share towards infrastructure, especially with regards to access roads and wastewater treatment to ensure the safety of the community. 215 Melinda Menchetti The 2045 General Plan relies on further implementation actions, such as zoning and budget ordinances, to move Hawai’I Island in the direction of stated goals. Priority projects need to be added to HDOT’s Regional Long-range Surface Transportation Plan (LRTP) to be eligible for federal and State highway funding. Projects established in the General Plan as a priority for the protection of community health and safety should be added to the LRTP to ensure their eligibility for State and federal transportation funding. The County should adopt a policy requiring that approval of new developments should be contingent upon the obligation of developers to contribute their prorata share towards infrastructure, especially with regards to access roads and wastewater treatment to ensure the safety of the community. 215 Kate Strickland The 2045 General Plan relies on further implementation actions, such as zoning and budget ordinances, to move Hawai’I Island in the direction of stated goals. Priority projects need to be added to HDOT’s Regional Long-range Surface Transportation Plan (LRTP) to be eligible for federal and State highway funding. Projects established in the General Plan as a priority for the protection of community health and safety should be added to the LRTP to ensure their eligibility for State and federal transportation funding. The County should adopt a policy requiring that approval of new developments should be contingent upon the obligation of developers to contribute their prorata share towards infrastructure, especially with regards to access roads and wastewater treatment to ensure the safety of the community. 215 Kendra Bruno The 2045 General Plan relies on further implementation actions, such as zoning and budget ordinances, to move Hawai’I Island in the direction of stated goals. Priority projects need to be added to HDOT’s Regional Long-range Surface Transportation Plan (LRTP) to be eligible for federal and State highway funding. Projects established in the General Plan as a priority for the protection of community health and safety should be added to the LRTP to ensure their eligibility for State and federal transportation funding. The County should adopt a policy requiring that approval of new developments should be contingent upon the obligation of developers to contribute their prorata share towards infrastructure, especially with regards to access roads and wastewater treatment to ensure the safety of the community. 215 Jennifer Tanaka The 2045 General Plan relies on further implementation actions, such as zoning and budget ordinances, to move Hawai’I Island in the direction of stated goals. Priority projects need to be added to HDOT’s Regional Long-range Surface Transportation Plan (LRTP) to be eligible for federal and State highway funding. Projects established in the General Plan as a priority for the protection of community health and safety should be added to the LRTP to ensure their eligibility for State and federal transportation funding. The County should adopt a policy requiring that approval of new developments should be contingent upon the obligation of developers to contribute their prorata share towards infrastructure, especially with regards to access roads and wastewater treatment to ensure the safety of the community. 217 Nicholas Ing, DLNR: CWRM The Commission on Water Resource Management (Commission) supports the intent of the management plan and the work of DOFAW and it partners to protect forested watersheds, dunes, and wetlands that provide aquifer recharge. The Commission’s Water Resources Protection Plan (WRPP) prioritizes protection of forested watersheds necessary to protect and sustain ground and surface water resources statewide. Watershed and forest protection remains a priority for the State and the Commission and is vital to sustain water resources used for drinking, T&C practices, and the enforcement of instream flow standards. 217 Page 34 Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 - Online Konveio Public Comments - July 28 thru Sepember 27, 2024 User name Comment Page Nicholas Ing, DLNR: CWRM Impacts to ground water dependent ecosystems are becoming an emerging issue as impacts to these are related to impacts to traditional & customary practices of sustenance from these ecosystems. We recommend consultation with the region's (moku) Aha Moku Council on whether a land use conversion or project that uses water will impact any traditional & customary practices. 225 Alexandra Hustace The 2045 General Plan relies on further implementation actions, such as zoning and budget ordinances, to move Hawai’I Island in the direction of stated goals. Priority projects need to be added to HDOT’s Regional Long-range Surface Transportation Plan (LRTP) to be eligible for federal and State highway funding. Projects established in the General Plan as a priority for the protection of community health and safety should be added to the LRTP to ensure their eligibility for State and federal transportation funding. The County should adopt a policy requiring that approval of new developments should be contingent upon the obligation of developers to contribute their prorata share towards infrastructure, especially with regards to access roads and wastewater treatment to ensure the safety of the community. 226 Georjean Adams duplicate 228 Katherine Pomeroy Which department has the most power to decide about rezoning: the Planning Department or the DWS? 237 James Hustace Is there any reference to the hurdles and likelihood of these proposed routes? Cost analysis? Community preference? Projects currently in the pipeline? 274 Zaheva Knowles There are pre-contact house-sites and other significant archaeological sites in the areas current designated for low- density urban expansion along the stream side of Kawaihae Road just below Waiaka Bridge in Kamuela. This area is designated for development as part of the Department of Hawaiian Homelands Lalamilo Development. The State has removed the planned "by-pass" road through this area based on its awareness that these are lands with Hawaiian burials and archaeological sites in the area. THIS AREA SHOULD NOT BE DEVELOPED. 280 Page 35 Public Workshops Questions and Comments Page 36 COUNTY OF HAWAIʻI GENERAL PLAN (GP) PUBLIC WORKSHOPS 2024 Questions and Answers North Kona General Plan Public Workshop, August 28, 2024 Climate Change Q: Why is there such a huge emphasis on climate change in the General Plan? A: This is the first General Plan that addresses climate change. We have many reports from the federal to state level on the existing impacts of climate change in various ways. We are experiencing impacts from climate change like heat index, the loss of natural habitats, and invasive species, and it is important for the General Plan to address that in planning for the next 25 years. Land Use Q: Why not add a Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Commission (PONC) designation to clarify and avoid future confusion? A: For land use designations, all the identified lands are classified as conservation areas due to their environmental importance and the limited allowable uses under the PONC provisions. Q: Is there a process for changing the land use pattern allocation guide (LUPAG) designations after the General Plan adoptions? A: Yes, it is called an interim amendment, and it is outlined in the current 2005 General Plan in Section 16.2. Q: Could the General Plan’s focus and prioritization of containing growth within the existing “urban areas” be made more definitive and stronger? A: We aimed to address this by focusing on distinct density areas, rather than designating one large urban expansion zone. This approach allows us to concentrate on the different types of density within each area. Q: Fire breaks are critical to reducing a fire’s impact on lives and structures, who is responsible for maintaining the government-owned lands? Are there state or federal funding for this? A: Wide open land typically falls under State jurisdiction and is managed by the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), which has mitigation funds available. Alternative options include trails and mass transit. Additionally, firebreaks can serve as egress routes during wildfires or other natural disasters, and many of these initiatives are eligible for federal funding. Page 37 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 2 Q: Could you clarify the difference in use between rural versus agricultural designation particularly related to short-term vacation rentals (STVR)? A: STVRs are regulated by the zoning code, and the General Plan does not determine their locations. Q: The North Kohala Community Development Plan (CDP) group has collectively submitted detailed comments on the land use maps, tax map key (TMK) by TMK, who do we need to talk to, so we get this right in the final? A: Some of the public comment suggestions have been incorporated into the land use maps for that area. We welcome further discussions, but please submit any remaining comments by September 26 or during the Planning Commission process. Q: Why haven’t the changes to the land use maps been specifically identified with their locations, especially those involving large landowners like Hokulia? A: A Land Use Change Map is now available for viewing. This interactive map highlights all areas with proposed land use changes in color, while unchanged areas are displayed in white. By zooming in and clicking on a polygon, you can access detailed information, including the parcel number, changes from the 2005 LUPAG to the 2024 General Plan Land Use (GPLU), state land use designation, and zoning district. You can access the map directly on the interactive website by clicking on 'Change Map' in the menu bar. Q: The world is experiencing hundreds of wildfires, some of which have caused residents to run for their lives, how is the General Plan addressing this activity? A: Wildfires are a growing concern globally. The plan addresses wildfire risk through several key strategies aimed at enhancing community safety and building resilience. By addressing climate mitigation and adaptation strategies, the plan aims to reduce factors that contribute to increased wildfire risks, such as prolonged droughts and changing weather patterns. The plan promotes responsible land use patterns, such as discouraging development in high-risk areas and incorporating buffer zones between development and natural areas prone to fire. The plan also encourages mitigation and preparedness efforts, such as landscaping practices, community education, and emergency response plans. Additionally, the plan highlights the importance of interagency coordination across the Fire Department, Civil Defense Agency, and federal partners to enhance wildfire preparedness, management, and recovery efforts. Q: How does or can the General Plan support infrastructure concurrency as demanded in the Kona CDP? A: The General Plan aligns with and supports infrastructure concurrency requirements by promoting policies that ensure development is in sync with Page 38 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 3 critical infrastructure improvements. Infrastructure concurrency is key to prevent the overburdening of existing systems. In the GP, primarily in the Land Use and Transportation sections (see Policy 11.4, Action 11.c, and Policy 19.7). The plan advocates for the timely and strategic expansion of infrastructure to accommodate growth, ensuring that developments are supported by adequate transportation, water resources, and emergency response systems. The GP also highlights cross-collaboration between state, county, and private sectors to ensure that infrastructure improvements align with projects. The GP also emphasizes sustainable growth management by connecting infrastructure to land use and zoning decisions. In this way, the plan aims to ensure growth happens in areas where infrastructure is already sufficient or can be sufficiently upgraded. Q: None of the components of the Kona CDP have been implemented to date. How will the General Plan help promote and buttress the Kona CDP ordinance? Please provide a specific example of where the two will intersect and how the public can be assured that a successful interface will occur. A: The General Plan sets the policy guidance for the CDPs, special area plans and urban plans, and functional plans. Those plans then inform regulatory measures (County Code and Administrative Rules) which help implement the GP. Permits and the County’s Capital Improvements Program (CIP) are also implementing mechanisms of higher-level planning efforts. The proposed Final Draft supports the Kona CDP, but it is not the role of the GP to implement any of the CDPs. For example, Policy 13.5 in the draft states, “Rezonings that promote infill are encouraged and should be conditioned to ensure connectivity to the surrounding developments and, where applicable, to provide mixed-use opportunities to make the area more pedestrian-oriented.” This policy comes primarily from the Kona CDP Policy LU-2.8 2.b.ii, “Rezonings that promote infill are encouraged. The concept of infill is to connect two or more pre-existing developments. Infill is usually associated with small-scale developments of 20 acres or less that have been leapfrogged by the surrounding or adjacent developments. Infill rezonings should be conditioned to ensure connectivity to the surrounding developments and, where applicable, to provide mixed-use opportunities to make the area more walkable.” Q: Is there any effort to revegetate our coastline or setbacks? A: Yes, the plan addresses coastal restoration efforts as part of the Biocultural Stewardship Chapter (Chapter 2). In this element, there are supporting strategies focused on protecting and maintaining coastal ecosystems and communities. Page 39 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 4 Transportation Q: How are evacuations and natural disasters addressed in the General Plan? Are these topics discussed within the transportation and infrastructure components of the draft? A: The draft General Plan includes policies and actions for establishing evacuation routes, while the Community Development Plan (CDP) identifies alternative routes. We focus on creating access routes for the community, such as bike trails, pedestrian paths, and mass transit facilities, which can be utilized in emergencies without increasing capacity. We are exploring connections between communities and identifying opportunities to enhance public access and mass transit. Our goal is to improve the flexibility of using these facilities during emergencies, without increasing their capacity for everyday use. Q: Transportation funding is planned through the Hawai’i Department of Transportation (HDOT), Long-Range Transportation Plan, and Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The General Plan does not discuss funding or timing for road projects. Can you prioritize road projects so that HDOT will have guidance from the County regarding the importance and relative need for each road project? For example, can you identify the highest priority for providing safe, emergency ingress/egress to and from Waikōloa Village? A: Yes, the General Plan sets the policy direction and guidance to inform agency functional plans and other regional plans for Hawaiʻi Island. The Capital Improvements Program (CIP) budget controls the funding of road projects. Q: How can we develop a parking plan for Kailua that serves local businesses? A: A parking plan for Kailua may be developed as an action item from the CDP or urban development plan, both of which fall under the General Plan within the County’s planning system. Q: Evacuations from natural disasters are not accounted for in the transportation portion of the plan, is that accurate? If they aren’t accounted for in the General Plan, how is the County preparing for the inevitable next evacuation order? A: The General Plan addresses evacuation routes in the Transportation section. Under Objective 17, there is a proposed action to explore the potential of multimodal trails to serve as evacuation routes during emergencies. Under the Mass Transit objective, there is an action to, “Designate new connectivity points for local traffic roads and create redundant routes for existing highways, utilizing existing routes where possible, that can also serve as emergency and evacuation routes.” Objective 22 contains an action focused on engaging with owners of private roads and community groups to identify and develop road management agreements that mitigate road closures to provide emergency Page 40 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 5 evacuation routes. While the GP does not specifically outline an evacuation plan, it sets the policy guidance for County action regarding evacuation routes in emergencies. Public Facilities Q: Zero waste by 2045 is a goal in the General Plan. What are the ideas to reduce waste (e.g., plastic water bottle ban and refill stations)? What other things could be done? A: Objective 33 regarding the County’s zero waste goal largely comes from the Hawaiʻi County Zero Waste Plan (2021). Some of the waste reduction strategies that are highlighted for the County to act on include composting, construction and demolition, plastics, electronics, and abandoned vehicles. Key actions would include developing and implementing programs, forming partnerships, and increasing or creating funding mechanisms. Housing Q: Does the current zoning code allow for options shown from the missing middle housing, if not, will zoning changes be proposed to support this? A: The zoning code does allow the missing middle, but the challenge is the infrastructure cost. Implementation Q: Do the various sections, like recycling have timelines for implementation? A: There is no descriptive timeline other than the objective of achieving zero waste by 2045. Q: It is obvious that not all the goals and objectives in the General Plan can be completed in twenty years. Could these items be broken up into short and long- term actions to guide which items should be worked on first? How does the budget and financing coordinate the priority of projects in the General Plan? A: In the implementation section, the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) serves as a tool to prioritize the goals and objectives outlined in the General Plan, as well as any agency plans, by aligning them with policies and actions. Q: Could the General Plan document be revised to compromise two volumes? Volume one being the bones of the key objectives, policies, and standards for all growth decisions, and volume two being all the background issues (e.g. challenges, opportunities, detailed beliefs, and planning principles). A: We received opposing feedback on this question. After years of debate and considering all the input and needs for the General Plan, the current format was chosen. Some people wanted more information, including history and Page 41 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 6 process details. In 2019, the document focused solely on policy language, which left many confused and asking for more justification. By 2023, we incorporated feedback that helped shape the current draft. Q: Can the public and County Council make comments and changes, that can be included in the final General Plan, or does that require a change in the law? A: This is outlined in Section 16.1 of the current 2005 General Plan. The Planning Commission submits its recommendations to the County Council, which can adopt the General Plan with or without amendments. If certain changes are not adopted as outlined in Section 16.1, those changes could be addressed through the interim amendment process after the plan is adopted. Q: How does the plan implement aspirational goals? For example, the plan identifies emergency access for high-risk hazard communities as a high priority. How is that objective reflected in transportation infrastructure actions? A: The aspirational goals of the plan are intended to provide a high-level integrated direction for the county. The objectives and guidelines in the plan then set measurable, achievable, and time-bound milestones toward accomplishing the goals. A policy is a type of regulatory implementing measure that defines boundaries, development parameters, and measures intended to implement the broader goal or objective. The actions of the plan are a type of non-regulatory implementing measure that requires subsequent decisions and/or the allocation of resources. Emergency access for high-risk hazard communities, including fire risk, is identified as a priority in the GP (e.g., Policy 12.11, 22.9). The following are transportation actions that support this priority in the GP: Action 17.b: Explore the potential of multimodal trails to serve as evacuation routes during emergencies. Action 20.d: Designate new connectivity points for local traffic roads and create redundant routes for existing highways, utilizing existing routes where possible, that can also serve as emergency and evacuation routes. Q: The implementation slide shows the county planning system in the order of the General Plan (overarching), CDPs, and County Code. Is this the order that development plans, subdivision plans, and the County Code should look to for guidance? A: Yes, the General Plan provides the policy guidance for the Community Development Plans and other planning documents to align with. The County Code and capital and operating budgets are regulatory measures that implement the policies in the GP. Page 42 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 7 Outreach and Engagement Q: How can the Planning Department improve outreach? A: We continually strive to improve outreach and do as much as we can. We send e-blasts to those on our email lists, publish newspaper articles, issue press releases, make radio announcements, distribute flyers, post on social media and our website, and engage with neighborhood organizations and word of mouth. We're always open to new ideas and opportunities for expanding our efforts. Q: Throughout the draft General Plan, many statements address civic and community engagement, listening and incorporating comments and concerns from Native Hawaiians. There has been no discussion in staff reports or development proposals. How will this high-level goal of engagement be woven into staff reports in a meaningful and consistent way? A: We have received thousands of public comments from the community, including Native Hawaiians, and have incorporated them into the policies, actions, goals, and objectives of the General Plan. Staff will then use the General Plan to inform future background and recommendation reports for specific applications. South Hilo General Plan Public Workshop, August 29, 2024 Climate Change Q: How is the current storm surge different now than it has been in the past? A: As our climate warms, water expands and sea levels rise. When storms occur, they exacerbate flooding, as the increased wave energy further impacts our infrastructure and community. Q: How much have temperatures increased in recent years? What is the proof of warming temperatures? How many years of temperature data are used to prove that temperatures are rising? A: Global temperatures have risen significantly over the years, with the past decade being the warmest on record. According to NASA and NOAA, the global average temperature has increased by approximately 1.1°C (2°F). Scientific evidence of warming comes from various sources, including satellite data, weather stations, ocean buoys, and ice core samples, which all confirm a steady rise in temperatures over the last century. Climate models and long-term datasets, often using over 100 years of data, are essential in establishing this trend. In the context of the County’s General Plan, rising temperatures are a critical concern. Climate change affects sea-level rise, weather patterns, and local ecosystems, all of which impact land use, Page 43 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 8 infrastructure, and community resilience. The plan includes policies aimed at climate adaptation and mitigation, ensuring that our county is prepared for the challenges of warming temperatures and their effects on the island’s unique environments and communities. Q: Why are invasive species a part of climate change? A: Invasive species are affecting our island, along with storm surges along the coast that are damaging our infrastructure. Climate change has already had an impact, and we are focusing on the future to find ways to mitigate these effects. Land Use Q: Why was a Hilo CDP not done, when Hilo has the most population? A: Given the process of adopting the General Plan, it may be considered that Hilo would better benefit from an urban development plan rather than a regional plan, although this is still to be determined. The latest Hilo CDP is dated 1975. Further, the greater Hilo area has several other planning documents and tools that other towns and regions do not have and that help to guide development in and around Hilo. These include but are not limited to: the City of Hilo Zone Map (HCC 25-8-33), Downtown Hilo Multimodal Master Plan, Banyan Drive Redevelopment Authority Plan, EnVision Downtown Hilo, Hilo Bayfront Trails Master Plan, DHHL Master Plans for each of its areas (like Panaewa and Keaukaha), University of Hawaii in Hilo Master Plan, State Airport Master Plan, etc. Q: I saw that there is a goal to have parks within a ten-minute walk. While this is a great goal that has been achieved in several areas, it seems like a trade-off from one well-maintained park in a larger area versus several small, sad, unmaintained parks. Waikōloa is a prime example of this. How is this being discussed and resolved? A: Objective 35 states, “Park facilities are located within a 10-minute walk in urban areas and a 10-minute drive in rural communities.” This objective speaks to the County’s effort to increase recreational opportunities across the island. The County strives to have a variety of recreational facilities that vary in size from large regional to small community and neighborhood parks. The maintenance and improvement of public facilities are key priorities of the GP. Strategies such as maintaining an asset management program, diversifying funds for recreational facilities, and coordinating state and county capital improvements are mentioned in the plan to support this. Q: I noticed that our property is being zoned for natural and recreation from low density urban. What does that do to the value of our property? Are we going to be compensated, to quote your draft “zoning must be updated in certain areas to Page 44 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 9 reflect shifting trends and land use preferences”? Who’s deciding? Does it include property owners? A: The future land use maps, or the LUPAG map, do not affect zoning, and the existing entitlements remain in place. We are focusing on future growth and its potential locations. The CDP identified areas for adjustment, and that input was incorporated into the General Plan. Additionally, it allows for the possibility of rezoning in the future. Q: What is “smart growth development” and “smart growth principles”? Does this refer to smart cities, ala UN Agenda 21? A: The smart growth principles benefit our island. Our biggest challenge is housing, compounded by a lack of infrastructure. By establishing urban growth boundaries in each urban area, we can promote higher density development and focus on improving infrastructure (e.g., wastewater, water, etc.) and making investments to achieve these goals in each geographic area. Implementation Q: How can a layperson compare the old plan with the changes in this draft? Specifically, I would like to compare the map changes and the rationale for the shifts. A: The changes can be viewed in the policy rationale document. A Land Use Change Map is now available for viewing. This interactive map highlights all areas with proposed land use changes in color, while unchanged areas are displayed in white. By zooming in and clicking on a polygon, you can access detailed information, including the parcel number, changes from the 2005 LUPAG to the 2024 General Plan Land Use (GPLU), state land use designation, and zoning district. You can access the map directly on the interactive website by clicking on 'Change Map' in the menu bar. Q: How can the County identify and acquire more coastal parkland, and make managed retreat effective to protect our parks, roads, and infrastructure? A: We have an active PONC that assists the County in acquiring private properties for conservation. This has effectively facilitated the preservation of coastal properties and their unique resources. Regarding managed retreat, we need to consider infrastructure such as Ali’i Drive and Bayfront Highway, which have been impacted. We must plan for their rehabilitation to withstand coastal surges, ensuring that these roadways are designed to protect them and continue functioning as multi-modal passageways. Q: This is rather late in the General Plan drafting process, how will comments be addressed at this late stage? Page 45 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 10 A: The final recommended General Plan will be submitted to the Planning Commission. All comments received from July 29th to September 26th will be collected and provided to the Planning Commission for their review. They will hold public hearings and make recommendations to the County Council, which will then deliberate and formulate its recommendations. Outreach and Engagement Q: How will the Hilo community be engaged on a regular basis given that there is no CDP Action Committee? A: There are numerous organizations and associations throughout the community that are highly involved in planning efforts impacting the Hilo community. Many have been engaged throughout the process, including but not limited to civic organizations, community groups, each of the DHHL neighborhoods, and more. All Hilo residents are welcome and encouraged to subscribe to the General Plan and other planning-related email notifications. The Planning Department also has 3 active social media accounts. Our Hilo office is open for those who would like to come in and talk with staff. Q: What is the difference between the public workshops and community meetings? Will more specific district content be covered? A: The Hilo and Kona workshops, along with the webinar, provide a broad overview of the General Plan, and we will be reviewing each section. The community meetings will focus on the specific policies and guidance relevant to those communities, discussing the connections between the CDPs and other master plans, and how they have been integrated. You can also view the policy rationale document online. Q: How will I be able to know whether my comments have been addressed or considered? A: The Planning Department has reviewed and considered all comments received and incorporated the feedback to the best of its ability while trying to strike a balance with the great variety and sometimes opposing comments received. Online Webinar Workshop, September 5, 2024 Biocultural Stewardship Q: Why is there no “Action” for protecting the public trust in the 7/24 draft GP? A: Addressing public trust, the Biocultural Stewardship chapter speaks to the duty to protect natural and cultural resources for future generations. Specific details are spelled out in the action portion of the Plan. Actions related to public trust resources start on page 42 of the document. It includes specific Page 46 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 11 actions from watersheds to wetland habitats. All of those are addressed by specific actions versus broad policy. Q: “Public trust”, page 41, Biocultural Stewardship Policy 1.1, “Minimize and mitigate significant impacts, such as degradation, incompatible uses, or other threats to Native Hawaiian habitats and public trust resources.” Why are cumulative impacts not addressed as required in Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes 343? A: Cumulative impacts are inherent in the policy language. We welcome public comment on adding “cumulative” to the language. Q: Has the Scenic Resources report been made available to the general public? A: Yes, the Scenic Resources Protection Program and Strategies Report (2016) is available to the public. It can be accessed from the Planning Department’s Public Documents Repository: https://records.hawaiicounty.gov/Weblink/1/fol/134446/Row1.aspx The report is also linked on the Planning Department’s General Plan Comprehensive Review page, under “2024 Recommended Draft General Plan Workshops & Public Input”. https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/general-plan-community- planning/gp/comp Q: Why is there no action stating that the county must protect these public rights of way throughout all decision-making processes? A: Action 17.a would address including ROW from the Highways Act. “Develop and adopt a program to establish public access to historic and modern active living corridors and facilities that provide an island-wide route and connect to major destinations.” Further, the Highways Act gave ROW to the state which differs from county ROW. In this action, we seek to create a network of trails that can include these historic trails. Land Use Q: What criteria/guidance was used in establishing the ratios shown for the changes in the 2024 land use? A: Guidance for the land use process came from the Community Development Plans (CDPs). For those detailed and specific, the County adopted what the CDP called for, given the robust, immediate, and regional community in those areas. CDPs and other land uses and master plans have guided the overall process of proposing what the County has now in the GP land use maps. Land use was not done to reflect particular percentages or ratios. The bar charts are a result of putting all of the guidance we used into the maps and reflect what Page 47 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 12 resulted from that work. This is further outlined in the land use methodology under the reports and resources section on the County’s website. Q: Are these maps available in the General Plan 2045? I am trying to follow along and see what the speakers are addressing. A: Yes, in both the document and also on the interactive website. Q: Can you share some of the practical effects of more open land being classified as “natural” versus “extensive agriculture” compared to the 2005 LUPAG? Mahalo! A: The intention was specific to extensive agricultural lands that fit the criteria. Higher elevations are one, ensuring those are preserved as that and, hopefully, not developed for urban use, even with agriculture designation. Natural describes the intention behind holding those lands in their current state, be it in agriculture such as pastured or forested lands. It does not change the underlying zoning. Existing zoning still applies to any of those lands as well as historic lava flows that are not productive to areas like that. Q: Is one of the General Plan’s goals to convert our towns and urban areas into 15- minute smart cities? A: The GP does not speak to 15-minute cities. It speaks to what has been done with the community through CDPs and what they want for their community and their urban areas as well as the work done with the community through this GP process. Q: Is there a process for changing LUPAG designations after GP adoption? A: Yes, it is called the interim amendment process. It is initiated by the County Council to the Planning Director and Planning Commissions. It returns to the County Council if additional changes are needed after the adoption of the GP. Q: Why is the entire Hokuliʻa project being changed from Agriculture to Rural when there is a petition to accomplish the same before the state Land Use Commission which would ensure a Supplemental Environment Impact Statement would be prepared to help assure that no luxury homes would be built on the sacred, wahi pana of Puʻu Ohau, the entirety of which is a royal mausoleum where the grandmother of Queen Liliuokalani and King Kalakaua is buried? A: The process for petitioning a change to the State Land Use is a different process regulated by the State Land Use Commission. The GP designation does not preempt, negate, or change any actions that may be required of the landowner through the state petition process including compliance with HRS 343. Page 48 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 13 Q: Why has 25,000 acres of Rural been added to the GP 2045 land use map? Where are these changes other than over 1,000 acres at Hokuliʻa? A: As presented in the workshops, the rural designations were added to provide better transitions between agriculture and urban uses. The rural areas allow for smaller agricultural parcels and a mix of residential uses. The rural additions can be found and the Land Use Change Map online and should be marked in a range of mustard or yellow colors. Q: Given the online “swipe” tool forces the general public into a game of seek-and- find, why has the Planning Department refused to provide a written list of changes between the current GP land use map and the draft GP 2045 together with the location of each change not been provided to the public, especially since the map changes between the 1989 and current GP were provided to the public during the comprehensive review process? A: The Planning Department has a Land Use Change Map available for viewing. This interactive map highlights all areas with proposed land use changes in color, while unchanged areas are shown in white. By zooming in and clicking on a polygon, you can view detailed information, including parcel number, changes from the 2005 LUPAG to the 2024 GPLU, State Land Use, and zoning district. The map can also be accessed directly from the interactive website by clicking on “Change Map” in the menu bar. Map changes were made based on CDPs and criteria outlined in the methodology reports, which substantiate the change proposed. They were done in an electronic map via GIS that merges many different layers including old and current parcel data, 2005 LUPAG, many of which are noted on the disclaimer of the extensive list of polygons. Not all land use designations follow TMK boundaries and there can be many polygons within 1 parcel. Q: Why were the number of detailed land use maps reduced from 24 in the current GP to 6 in the 7/24 draft GP, thereby making it effectively impossible to compare printouts from the current GP .pdf with printouts from the 7/24 draft GP? A: This was done to simplify the document itself, given that the data will always live and be available electronically. The online maps are a powerful tool that allows people to zoom in and out as needed for their specific uses. Transportation Q: Has anyone considered a train around the island by 2045? A: There have been no talks about trains specifically. The County is working to build a transit network with the Mass Transit Administration’s (MTA) Mass Transit and Multimodal Master Plan from 2018 and the spoke and hub system that was presented in that plan. Page 49 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 14 Q: Are evacuations from natural disasters accounted for within the infrastructure & transportation components of the plan? A: This needs to happen at a more detailed level for each county. While the GP supports that effort and policy, more work needs to be done on a community level to address that. The County has language that addresses active transportation corridors, in everyday use for biking, and from communities during times of disaster. Q: Will the roadway and green infrastructure concepts be incorporated into DPW standards? A: The GP has some standards laid out in terms of what is available. The County has the complete streets manual, titled County of Hawaiʻi Street Design Manual. The manual incorporates complete streets and speaks to green design in the landscape section and is adopted by resolution, allowing flexibility for DPW to use the manual. Some policies and actions speak to adopting updated ordinances, codes, and amendments to better incorporate alternative multimodal street options. Additionally, there are policies within the GP that speak to green infrastructure and stormwater management. This goes back to the discussion on one water in the utility section. While the County has wastewater and DWS, DPW manages stormwater. As a community grows, the County looks more at how they can better manage that stormwater. Q: For mass transit, what type of transit will be used? A: For the most part, when considering the bus system as a mass transit system, the General Plan references the 2018 MTA Mass Transit and Multimodal Master Plan, acknowledging that there is still much work to be done in this area. Q: Before using any land for transportation, will the DOT do a title search to make sure it’s a clear title? A: The State Department of Transportation (HDOT) ensures that land acquisitions have clear titles. This question may be better directed to HDOT for further clarification. Q: The roundabout in Pahoa has created traffic slowdowns by at least 20 minutes. Have studies been conducted on the efficiency of the existing roundabout? There are roundabouts planned for Waimea which would result in greater problems with congestion. Are there other considerations? A: While we understand the frustration related to traffic slowdowns, it's important to clarify that the General Plan is a high-level policy document focused on guiding long-term growth and land use in the County of Hawaiʻi. Specific studies on traffic efficiency, such as the performance of existing or Page 50 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 15 planned roundabouts, fall under the purview of the State Department of Transportation (DOT) or the County’s Department of Public Works (DPW), depending on the roadway jurisdiction. The 2 roundabouts in Puna (Ainaloa and Pahoa) were once 2 of the highest crash and personal injury intersections. The roundabouts may slow traffic to some extent during rush hours, but they also allow all connecting streets to continue to move. Public Utilities Q: How does the plan incorporate the requirement that cesspools be replaced by other waste management systems? A: The GP incorporates the State mandate requiring cesspool conversions by 2050 as part of its broader goals for environmental protection, public health, and sustainable infrastructure. The plan recognizes the significant environmental and public health concerns associated with cesspools, particularly their impact on water quality, and outlines several strategies to support the transition to more effective waste management systems. Strategies include infrastructure upgrades, including the expansion of wastewater treatment facilities and sewer systems and developing a multipronged approach to wastewater infrastructure funding. In addition, the GP supports land use policies that promote higher density development in areas where modern waste treatment systems are feasible, reducing the reliance on cesspools and encouraging the use of advanced systems like septic tanks, aerobic treatment units, and connection to public sewer systems. The County will work closely with the State Department of Health and other agencies to align local policies and infrastructure projects with the statewide mandate for cesspool conversion. Q: Was it possible to calculate island-wide ongoing water reserves to guide future/usage development? A: The General Plan considers and incorporates the County’s Water Use and Development Plan into its strategies relating to water conservation. The Department of Water Supply (DWS) would be the agency to obtain any ongoing data collection information. Q: Is there a section of the plan that addresses the environmental impact of current practices of County agencies like Public Works and how to mitigate adverse impacts with today’s stormwater, especially Hōlualoa? A: The General Plan addresses stormwater impacts and enhances County collaboration on water resources through a comprehensive approach aimed at protecting water quality, managing runoff, and improving coordination across agencies. The GP promotes the adoption of green infrastructure and low-impact development (LID) practices. Key policies include encouraging the Page 51 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 16 integration of natural features in urban design to absorb stormwater; supporting improvements in drainage systems to handle increased runoff in both urban and rural areas; and requiring new developments to implement stormwater management systems that meet current best practices to minimize downstream impacts on water resources. The GP emphasizes collaboration between County departments, state agencies, and other entities involved in water management. It encourages coordinated efforts with the Department of Water Supply (DWS), the State Commission on Water Resource Management (CWRM), and other bodies to ensure that stormwater management aligns with broader water resource protection goals. This includes joint planning for flood control and stormwater infrastructure upgrades; sharing data and resources to monitor and manage water quality; and encouraging partnerships with community organizations to implement water stewardship programs and improve watershed health. Public Facilities Q: Does this plan go into any detail about zero waste plans for refuse? A: It is more of a high-level look. Objectives speak to high-level policies to support zero waste. A more detailed plan still needs to be formalized. Q: I don't see where hospitals and general healthcare access are included in your categories, nor do I see where affordable housing is described. Any comment? A: The GP strongly supports the improvement of healthcare access and the development of affordable housing as critical components of creating a sustainable and equitable future for Hawaiʻi County. The plan includes policies aimed at improving the distribution of healthcare facilities across the island, especially in underserved areas. The plan also emphasizes collaboration with state and private healthcare providers to enhance services and attract more health professionals to the island. Affordable housing is another priority of the plan, which acknowledges the growing housing crisis and the need to provide more housing options for all residents. The plan supports a variety of strategies to increase the availability of affordable housing, including encouraging mixed-use developments and higher density housing in urban areas; encouraging workforce housing and affordable retirement communities; partnering with state and federal programs to secure funding for affordable housing initiatives; prioritizing the development of affordable housing near job centers, schools, and transit to ensure residents can easily access services and employment opportunities. Housing Q: Does the General Plan address the need for single-family housing? Page 52 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 17 A: Yes, single-family housing is addressed in the housing section (Section 4.5). Q: Single-family housing is most needed for space with big families. How can this be done with a high cost of living? A: The General Plan acknowledges the challenges that larger families face in securing single-family housing, particularly given the high cost of living in the county. The GP emphasizes increasing the availability of affordable single- family homes by encouraging developments that provide a range of housing options, including homes suited for large families. This includes policies that encourage the development of affordable housing through density bonuses, fast-tracked permitting for affordable projects, and partnerships with private developers. The GP also supports mixed-use developments and infill housing to increase supply in areas with existing infrastructure, reducing development costs and making housing more affordable. Q: Is self-certification being considered for licensed architects to help the affordability of housing like Honolulu and other cities, counties, and states to speed up the permit process? A: We recognize the challenges posed by the high cost of living and its impact on housing affordability. While the General Plan does not specifically address self-certification for licensed architects as a means to expedite the permitting process, it emphasizes several strategies to improve housing affordability and streamline development processes. The GP advocates for reducing barriers and delays in the permitting process to encourage the timely development of housing, especially affordable housing. The GP also encourages partnerships with private and nonprofit organizations to leverage resources and expertise in constructing affordable housing projects. These collaborations can result in cost-sharing and innovative approaches to housing development. The plan encourages flexibility in zoning and building regulations that can make it easier to develop housing, especially in areas designated for residential growth. By reducing regulatory hurdles, the County aims to create an environment where housing projects can move forward more efficiently. Q: Housing is being misused here and a lot of developments are developing high- end houses. How can this be prevented? A: The General Plan acknowledges the growing concern regarding the need to promote more affordable and diverse housing options for residents. The GP includes several policies and strategies aimed at encouraging the creation of housing that meets the needs of the local population. The plan promotes the development of a variety of housing types, including multi-family units, affordable rental housing, and workforce housing, to meet the diverse needs of the community. This helps balance the market and prevents an overemphasis on luxury housing. The GP also emphasizes the importance of Page 53 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 18 increasing affordable housing through incentives, zoning changes, and partnerships with developers to prioritize housing that serves low- and moderate-income families. Implementation Q: What is in place in the General Plan to ensure implementation of components is realized in a timely manner? I.e., connectivity of Puna substandard subdivisions for mass transit, first responder response, and the general movement of people. A: The GP outlines priority actions that are intended to help guide County investments. Another key element in the plan that supports implementation is collaboration with agencies. Implementation requires close coordination with various county and state agencies to align their efforts with GP goals. This collaboration is essential to improving things like mass transit and first responder response times. More specific plans such as agency functional plans (e.g., Mass Transit and Multimodal Transportation Master Plan) are supported by the GP and provide more detailed strategies and timelines for achieving specific goals, such as mass transit connectivity. The GP also includes a framework for regular monitoring, reporting, and review to ensure progress is being made. Through periodic updates and reports, the County can assess whether implementation is on track and adjust as needed. Outreach and Engagement Q: What makes this a “workshop” versus a presentation with a limited Q&A session? A: A presentation was requested in previous Q&A sessions. In workshops and throughout the comprehensive review process, these sessions have been referred to as workshops and the County continues to use that terminology to be consistent with the GP review process (2005 GP, Section 16.1). Early in the process, the County provided hands-on workshops, charrettes, and community meetings with stations where people could walk around and have conversations with subject matter experts. The County is now at the point of proposing the final recommended draft and moving through the adoption process. Q: How can members of the public get a hard copy of the current plan draft? A: The Hilo and Kona County offices have copies available. If you would like to request one, please email your address to generalplan@hawaiicounty.gov. Q: What is the address of the interactive website? A: https://cohplanning.konveio.com/final-recommended-draft-general-plan- 2045?document=1. Links are also available on the County’s website and the County’s Planning Department website. Page 54 General Plan Public Workshops Q&A (2024) Page 19 Q: Will the recording of this webinar be available to the general public? A: Yes, it is available on the Planning Department’s website on the GP comprehensive review page: https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/general-plan-community- planning/gp/comp Q: How do we know if our comments have been addressed or have been included in the draft 2045? A: The Planning Department reviews and considers all comments received and incorporates the feedback to the best of our ability. Other Q: Is there any distinction between a long-term resident of Hawaiʻi Island (someone rooted in the community and its interests for the long term) vs. transient or short- term “residents”? A: Yes, there is a distinction between long-term resident or transient or short- term stays on the island. Although not specifically addressed in the GP, it is addressed in the County Code and aspects of Hawaiʻi County’s tax code as it relates to long-term residents as well. General Comments • Although all goals, policies, standards, and courses of action from the current General Plan were reviewed and evaluated for inclusion in the draft 9/23 and 7/24 GP 2045s, the General Plan Policy Rationale does not specifically identify which of these were included or excluded in the drafts. This lack of clarity makes it difficult for the general public and decision-makers to assess whether they agree with the Planning Director’s recommendations. Transparent documentation of these decisions would support informed public discourse and decision-making. • Land use around South Kona is marked for many changes into more housing, yet with no changes except for the increase of full-time residents have turned my husband’s commute from 20-25 minutes to 40+ minutes in four years to North Kona. The time in which these decisions have been made and don’t account for. How do these changes also take into account: moving the hospital from South Kona to North Kona, a death sentence for many illnesses, which was recently made public? The lack of sewer systems, and how many properties cannot be changed from cesspool to septic due to typography and have not been adequately addressed even though a deadline has been set. The roadways and how widening in many places is not a possibility. Water and lack of schools become questions that don’t change quickly to accommodate changes. I ask because the answer above given was that it was by community input, which is generally driven by personal and business desires, not community wellness or even reality. Mahalo. Page 55 I Q, rd Question For Panel Please write ONE question legibly for the panel to address. Question: S (A)-4-0, a. . sO c Lr LOLL; Please provide your contact information below, in the event your question is not answered today. Name: J ouNkc-e. Nr Phone: Email: Page 56 G C) Question For Panel Please write ONE question legibly for the panel to address. Question: or C L et- r o f-' 6N4-t"- off ovx, l Please provide your contact information below, in the event your question is not answered today. Name: Phone: Email: Page 57 questko r Question(s) for Panel Please write ONE question legibly for the panel to address. Question: 0.&...0215s f c zs s.5 . 40_.Q__, -{a s r( k 4- f f- dam 140"•- 5 . t 4 65 Please provide your contact information below, in the event your question is not answered today. Name: 3 ?azo ` -e n ' '- Phone: Email: Page 58 np q AeS-t 6-)' Question For Panel Please write ONE question legibly for the panel to address. Question:1.> C Please provide your ntact information below, in the event your question is not answered today. Name: Phone: f Email: Page 59 Question(s) for Panel Please write ONE question legibly for the panel to address. P uest'om 1h U fa I)al V G f751 b ,Q s fl v k- V Gf v! Cot Dvr Zgc-VT bn tiZsZ t c •rte c vtrne o rn4 c_'app 'reqfor I1 w I w ( r <r1v d ro vrbc r) tan c-eh rem was ays as s Please provide yoyr contar i f rmation below, in the event your question is not answered today. K'o c ehiName. Phone: Email. Page 60 ru h Sport tLon Question(s) for Panel Please write ONE question legibly for the panel to address. Question: ca.a2 0 (\ ' . k — e .;....,r s t 6- (kJ,A.‘n.r. }0\ osc CLQ-kY1i'c iPt aL+n c.t ..1 0 s t C., -kgn.e.d'&\ c\ cAn 1kg\C\U. e i WATVEZON•+V1/4et*A CNr‘ CXi©,: i " i 5 v..& cl d_ 4 . ....v,1 % t .> c....ior if" . 0 1,-A- ,1 t1, \ L. el r '6 k# W\ \lk /1 e LT 7 111.a C. tL-e Cri-- t,-e- 4' a\ r S .-X chs ,.-- e 45.-1 ve--4c 1- r S`A As n K1 e NA) ,e t, ci, 6.USL . t2 u- k 4+ ^^ie- S 44 f1 NAN 42 15.Y' `4 it1& 's i P moi- a . \_ i. dk S 4t v 6- 11.-V\ eV() l 6 eV S 1f 1 t LAN 0%.1&IN a/.V-SL - 1(l1 e1•'2 S*- toit-' 0 C\ ^nt- Njilak c ,.rrr c \e,. Or -a— 0- S v.. Please provide your contact information below, in the event your question is not answered today. Name: ,,O. t,- kizay‘ko i&r(va-{ Phone: Email: Page 61 Question(s) for Panel Please write ONE question legibly for the panel to address. fir r Question: 6, el CO1 s 0 ciLf't-ce' f4-cfr' s6-4-' Z t cTai-Le- 4 rot_ w-tk ` E etg_ ki,;c,Z.. 5 f_,Q l-11.--cLastArN do-„,...ta,CA.21 7 Please provide our tact i formation below, in the event your question is not answered today. Name: 124 Phone: Email: Page 62 99 esaY Question(s) for Panel Please write ONE question legibly for the panel to address. 4rcuestion: 10tJ 1 1Q1f I Q co.; 4ta- c? cl-P haw-to p-epave F im ot,Q P1oh ' 4i2P 7-11 P11 r _ SIJ atir QP Please provi e y ur c ntact i fo m tion below, in the event your question is not answered today. Name: fO IA 1 S Phone: 'WA— Email: Page 63 11,11 Question The panel will address as many General Plan related questions within the allotted time. Please write ONE question legibly per sheet. CO- 4, v6i 4'h [ 4 lot irtit 1(4-kirvvvL e2)aeA/k4tv 4 p:(1.0../5.tir 4 47 611AZA/tArVr• 41,""e‘ 71/11/114vt/ 474 1/14 kA,t(CLIA it 1,t ° tet f1 cAP it, -C- 1 A /G ar4 11=1,6P-etc] j 'Czv Please provide yo contact, information below, in the event your question is not answered today. Name: Pu r1 "iL Phone: Email: // Page 64 b 1(1q WNW* ply h a+ k u4(Auk Question The panel will address as many General Plan related questions within the allotted time. Please write ONE question legibly per sheet. V641671, kikorVA4ittaii4 451A.AD CoMsuly--7/ A. , Alk WeAv r dour e zifirk-(102 pcp-D ivReAk-c - e-eo- rz ›--Tiz tAkt,t (--71mc;b--- L ek Cr tct. di 94,5141Pi 4tr- Please rovide o contact information below, in the event your question is not answered today. Name: V Phone: Email: / Page 65 3 ?A CPI/AM"' — Pt-tiokt, Ettalis Question The panel will address as many General Plan related questions within the allotted time. Please write ONE question legibly per sheet. i--. 4,, IA 1 Y1) 1.4 —17 Ac,11,-tt-t 1‘.. .21-74514-,--- A,11,,„.) pea It-c, 4-6J 14-1./$ -4/2 -zi /(12 P GT-01 e/ d.e Please provide your contact information below, in the event your question is not answered today. Name: WAI-‘ QGU-rblit Phone: Email: Page 66 401 mi(\t e, * oV — - autiiitS Question The panel will address as many General Plan related questions within the allotted time. Please write ONE question legibly per sheet. ft/KilA V 112d6rre(-friAr f 1 e i I1 PI tc:4,61 0 et Please provide your contact information below, in the event your question is not answered today. Name: Vali\ At(AAA Phone: Page 67 a.0 crnmnt- — r t elOiectLcn Question The panel will address as many General Plan related questions within the allotted time. Please write ONE question legibly per sheet. 9V(Ael, --/E) p47) Pt-v ir,cce t,O/d7«r? A tom/\14-t 4 (Gt S( Sf°< -v -h l' ttv:e s v(/c,vGt ( .*e- fQo L , s )- Dkvo1iA4-al rui1 tie - j itv Please provide ycy contact information below, in the event your question is not answered today. nthName: 1 Phone: ' Email: Page 68 sreC Iyu Question The panel will address as many General Plan related questions within the allotted time. Please write ONE question legibly per sheet. Idt, - 7` rr-k ( iN01- CA.CC Ge 5 5-0.4-ex G(1 g C.4.(cC pf-ifyait( e‘"Alok . wtui P+ 4tA, Lot,t\c( - 41 Y Matt_ 4.0w1kjd2_0(.6. Q V Nc_ itVinv•Plf 1 t 7-1(th I `-co Vkakre_teu4r___ CC. e5 -47C2__) ia4.4 #11,0't FON C e_644LI, trivaLcs, 1Ak vaut actitt(e-1). ---"L 1yi 6111 ytoNL Please provide your contact information below, in the event your question is not answered today. Name:Wc _ Phone: Email: Page 69 Community Meetings Questions and Comments Page 70 Kona CDP Action Committee General Plan (GP) Questions and Answers Tuesday, September 17, 2024 Land Use Q: What is the reasoning behind removing 400,000 acres from agricultural designation in the General Plan? A: Many of these areas are in high-elevation regions, above 2,500-3,000 feet, and are largely forested. If they were not already under State Land Use Conservation, the plan proposes designating them as natural areas. While some of these lands are still zoned for agricultural use and can support certain agricultural activities, areas with dense forest and native canopy are being shifted into the natural designation to protect those ecosystems. Q: What is the significance of moving certain areas into a rural designation in the General Plan? A: While the proposal to move some areas into a rural designation does not change the underlying agricultural zoning, it reflects the current use of the properties, many of which are already divided into relatively small lots. The goal of this designation is to better utilize rural land across different communities and to create some transition between smaller lots in urban areas and larger lots in agriculture areas. Q: Does the General Plan change existing County zoning, and what is the process for any potential zoning changes? A: No, the General Plan does not change existing County zoning, such as agriculture on five acres (zoned Ag-5a). Any changes to zoning would require a separate process involving notification and participation from all affected landowners. This typically happens by application from the landowner, but it is unclear if the County has ever initiated such changes on a large scale. General Plan Process and Implementation Q: After every meeting, what happens to the questions collected in each district? A: The Planning Department will have a Q&A document for each General Plan community meeting. All public comments will be available on the Planning Department website. All comments recieved during this period will also be packaged and submitted to the Planning Commissions to help inform their review and recommendation to the County Council. Q: Will the comments be a part of this draft? A: No, there have been several drafts published within the past few years. This is the Planning Director’s Final Recommended Draft. All comments will be Page 71 Kona General Plan Community Meeting Page 2 forwarded to the Planning Commissions and County Council for their consideration. Q: What is the timeline for public comments regarding the draft? A: Public comments can be submitted from July 29th until September 29th, marking the first phase for gathering input. All comments received during this period will be compiled and presented to the Planning Commissions for their review and recommendations. Q: Will there be additional opportunities for public input after this initial phase? A: Yes, public comments will also be accepted during the Planning Commission phase and the County Council phase, ensuring ongoing community engagement throughout the process. Q: How does the General Plan affect the Community Development Plans (CDPs)? A: The current CDPs, which are adopted by ordinance, remain in effect even after the new General Plan is adopted. The General Plan does not automatically change the CDPs, but over time, CDPs will be revised to align with the new General Plan’s goals. If there is a conflict between the new General Plan and an existing CDP, the General Plan prevails. However, communities will have the opportunity to update their CDPs to reflect both their values and the General Plan. Q: How does the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) bill impact the draft General Plan? A: The ADU bill was introduced separately from the Draft General Plan and was not considered during its drafting. Any changes to reflect the ADU bill would need to come from the Planning Commission or County Council. However, since the ADU bill is now part of the County Code, it is law and will be allowed regardless of its inclusion in the General Plan. Sustainability Q: Does the General Plan address the need for the County and its residents to become more sustainable? A: Yes, the General Plan highlights sustainability by addressing key areas such as environmental conservation, climate resilience, sustainable land use, and local agriculture. However, there are larger factors at play. Some limitations to achieving sustainability include implementation challenges and economic constraints. The plan encourages creating more local economies and reducing dependence on imported goods. For example, food sustainability is highlighted, as the island has very limited food stores, which could be devastating during a major shutdown. Expanding local food production would be crucial for the island’s self-sufficiency. Page 72 Kona General Plan Community Meeting Page 3 Q: How does the general plan promote sustainability for residents? A: The plan encourages the development of a circular economy, where more local goods and services are produced, reducing the island’s reliance on imports. This would lead to greater self-sufficiency for residents, particularly in areas like food sustainability, where local food production is vital to being less dependent on outside sources. The plan also encourages compact, mixed-use development, limiting urban sprawl and promoting sustainable communities. It focuses on active living opportunities and reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT), which help reduce our environmental impact. The plan also prioritizes protecting natural resources. Its policies encourage the preservation of open space and conservation of native ecosystems, which will help protect our unique biodiversity. Transportation Q: How feasible is it to get everyone out of their cars and shift to walking, biking, or using mass transit? A: It is not realistic to expect 100% of people to stop using cars. However, even if just 3% of people make the shift, it could reduce traffic by 30%, improving everyone’s experience. The goal is to provide more transportation options, especially for those who can’t afford vehicles. By improving walkability, biking, and mass transit, we aim to offer people alternatives to driving. Q: What is the focus of the transportation plan in terms of reducing car dependency? A: The focus is on giving people more choices. Not everyone can afford a car and buying even a cheap one can be a financial burden. By improving infrastructure for walking and biking within communities and enhancing mass transit options, we strive to offer alternatives that make life more affordable and sustainable. It is about making small changes that, over time, improve the transportation system for everyone. Q: Will wealthy residents and newcomers really adopt these transportation changes? A: It is true that some people, especially those who can afford luxury cars, may continue to drive and pay for gas and taxes. However, the plan isn’t about forcing change on everyone but creating options for those who want or need alternatives. It’s about striking a balance between personal choices and improving community-wide transportation options. Q: Is a 50% increase in bus ridership really feasible, especially considering current ridership trends? A: Yes, this is achievable. While ridership declined by a third between 2010 and 2018, the goal is to regain that lost ridership, which represents a 50% increase Page 73 Kona General Plan Community Meeting Page 4 from the current levels. With ongoing improvements, such as making mass transit free until at least 2025 and offering free bike-share options, we believe this target is attainable. Q: How are current efforts helping to encourage more people to use mass transit? A: The county is focusing on creating a system where people can easily walk or bike to a bus stop within a short distance. Additional improvements include the potential introduction of e-bikes for hilly areas, making it easier for residents to navigate the terrain. Investments and grants have also made mass transit free, along with complimentary bike-share services, further incentivizing public transportation use. Q: What challenges remain for achieving higher ridership in the future? A: While increasing ridership is possible, challenges like the island’s difficult terrain remain. The introduction of e-bikes and technological advancements will help address these issues, but it will still require effort and adaptation to shift away from a car-centric culture. Comments Sustainability • A key issue is the distinction between energy and fuel; we import fuel, not energy, and we have abundant local energy sources like ocean, wind, and waves that should be clarified in your final draft. While tourism is our main economic driver, COVID-19 showed our vulnerability, so we need to refocus on conservation, agriculture, and culture. Transportation • We should explore affordable rail transit options like a ribbon track system, as well as reactivate fishponds and consider plant-based meat as an export item. CDP Priorities • The general plan sets the direction for what our community development plans (CDPs) should focus on and how they should approach planning. Every time a general plan is updated, it controls the scope of the CDPs. This isn’t in the county code, but it's determined by the general plan itself. • I’d like to suggest that moving forward, each CDP update should include a clear priority list for public facilities—things like parks, senior centers, and roads—so the community can engage and decide what projects should come first. We can’t control what private developers do, but we can decide which public projects should take priority in each region. • With limited county budgets, it’s important to know which projects are most critical. Right now, we have a long list of priorities, but not enough funding to get through them. For example, Kona has a list of about 14 major projects, but they would cost Page 74 Kona General Plan Community Meeting Page 5 over $100 million. Prioritizing will help us focus on what we can actually get done, rather than hoping for a windfall, like when the county got federal funding to build the Ane Keohokalole Highway. This approach could also help us deal with issues like sprawl and traffic. A lot of our traffic problems come from old subdivisions and approving new projects without considering their long-term impact. If our CDPs included a clear ranking of priorities, it would help us make better decisions about where and when to build and help manage the growth that’s impacting areas like Royal Vistage. • Thank you for the insights shared today. I appreciate the comments on prioritizing the CDP, but I believe we should focus on larger projects like the Kona Open Space Network to create a solid foundation for our plans. Allocating small amounts for minor initiatives risks losing an integrated approach. We need to prioritize significant investments in infrastructure and open space to truly implement our vision and promote sustainable transportation. Natural & Cultural Resources • I want to check in with the chairs and share important insights from our ancestors regarding our community's future, which I have documented and communicated to county officials and the Hawaii Legislature since 2010. Recently, I learned that the restoration of the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi is imminent, and at the recent mayoral forum, I reported that the ancestors advise against new developments along the 40 miles between Kaloko and Honaunau, including Royal Vistas. I stand here today representing the ancestors and urge everyone to heed these messages, as they hold the key to our community’s future. Thank you. • I am concerned about the Hokulia situation, where five lots on Puʻu Ohao, designated by the Hawaii Island Burial Council as a road mausoleum, are included in the general plan land use map and not classified as conservation. These lots on the north slope of Hokulia should be moved into conservation to prevent potential conflicts, as they are identified as a burial site. I urge the planning director to address this issue to avoid significant problems if homes are built in this area. • I want to highlight the importance of the 1978 Congress law that protects the freedom of religion, which also supports the first faith of Hawaii. This is a significant matter that should be included in the general plan, as it heralds real change that is already happening. The restoration of the Kingdom of Hawaii is not just a concept; it is a reality gaining recognition and support daily. I urge you all to discuss this with local leaders and to ensure this crucial information is documented in our planning efforts, as it is vital for our community's future. Page 75 Kaʻū CDP Action Committee General Plan (GP) Questions and Answers Thursday, September 19, 2024 Biocultural Stewardship Q: Why is there a large emphasis on stewardship in the General Plan? A: Stewardship plays a prominent role in the plan because of the island’s deep connection to its natural and cultural resources, as well as the growing need for sustainability and resilience. In terms of biocultural stewardship, stewardship reflects the Hawaiian value of mālama ʻāina (caring for the land), which is central to the island’s heritage. The plan recognizes the vital role that traditional knowledge and practices play in managing natural resources, and it seeks to integrate these practices into land use and resource management. As Hawaiʻi faces increasing threats from climate change, such as sea level rise, more frequent storms, and changing weather patterns, stewardship ensures that development is balanced with environmental conservation. The plan emphasizes responsible land management to protect ecosystems, water resources, and native species while promoting sustainability. The plan also highlights the importance of community-based stewardship, encouraging residents to take an active role in managing their environments. This approach fosters a stronger sense of ownership and responsibility toward preserving the island’s resources for future generations. Stewardship ensures that our island’s unique natural resources, such as forests, coastlines, and agricultural lands, are managed with a long-term perspective. This is crucial to sustaining the island’s economy, cultural identity, and ecological health. Land Use Q: We talk about agriculture, but we are giving away agricultural lands. A: There is a strong emphasis on protecting local agriculture and agricultural lands to ensure food security, economic sustainability, and the preservation of the island’s rural character. The Natural designation was added under the agriculture section as a broad category of open space that can include agricultural uses. LUPAG designations of Open and Extensive Agriculture were considered as appropriate candidates to transition to the Natural designation. Many of these include high altitude native forest areas and some historic lava flows that have not been able to support agriculture uses that are not already in state land use conservation. Further, for lands with existing County Zoning as agriculture, then those agriculture uses continue to be allowable. Page 76 Kaʻū General Plan Community Meeting Page 2 Q: Why is Oceanview proposed as rural in the General Plan Land Use Map? Is there a way to keep Oceanview in agricultural land use? A: The Kaʻū CDP notes Oceanview as a rural area, which is the reason for it being reflected as rural in the Final Recommended Draft GP. One of the priorities in the draft is to maximize and better utilize our rural areas. The purpose of the rural designation is to support smaller lot residential and agricultural uses. It is important to note that the GP cannot alter zoning or State Land Use designations. Combining lots does not affect density unless a rezoning occurs. Rezoning is a separate process. Q: What is the difference between the General Plan Rural land use designation and the Residential zoning district? A: The GP Land Use Map delineates the areas of future land use types and is intended to be forward-looking long-range guides subject to existing zoning and State Land Use Districts. The Rural land use designation is usually outside the urban growth areas (UGA). Rural areas typically contain low density residential development and support small-scale commercial development and agricultural land uses. The dwelling density in rural areas can be up to 4 units per acre. Within the rural designation, possible zoning includes Family Agriculture (1a) and Residential Agriculture (1a). The Residential zoning district is defined in the Zoning Code of the Hawaiʻi County Code (Chapter 25). The GP does not change existing zoning or subdivisions. The requirements for RS-15 (Single-Family Residential District with a minimum building site area of 15,000 square feet), is specified in the Zoning Code. In areas that have RS-15, the GP Land Use Map may propose a future land use designation of low density urban (LDU). Q: How are coral reefs designated in the policy maps? A: The data regarding coral reefs comes from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Transportation Q: Why are vehicle miles traveled (VMT) mentioned in the General Plan if they are not discussed in the CDPs? A: Reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is a key strategy to promote sustainable development and mitigating the environmental impact of transportation. VMT measures how far people travel by car and it directly affects traffic congestion, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and overall energy consumption. The Kona CDP discusses VMT as part of its transportation objective on street network connectivity. While not every CDP discusses reducing VMT, this Page 77 Kaʻū General Plan Community Meeting Page 3 essential strategy is supported by other functional agency plans and initiatives that are considered during the GP comprehensive review process. Reducing VMT is also important in alignment with our land use policies as well as public health and safety. Process and Implementation Q: Where are the General Plan’s recommendations/directives coming from? (Referencing the County Planning System diagram) A: The Community Development Plans (CDPs) have been instrumental in shaping the vision, goals, objectives, and policies of the Final Recommended Draft GP. The current CDPs were developed after the adoption of the 2005 GP. The 2005 GP was organized to include specific island regions due to the absence of CDPs. The current recommended draft aims to incorporate and elevate policies from the CDPs that have an island-wide impact. Q: Can the structure of the General Plan be further clarified? For example, explain the difference between the effect of guidelines and policies in the document. A: The General Plan vision statement, goals, and objectives provide a high-level integrated direction for the island. Guidelines in the plan serve as strategic directions to inform decisions regarding topics such as land use, infrastructure, housing, and resource management. They primarily come from the Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes (HRS), Section 226 (Hawaiʻi State Planning Act). Guidelines help to ensure consistency in planning and implementation. There is no penalty for deviating from a guideline. Policies are a type of regulatory implementation mechanism of the GP. In the General Plan, future land use maps, policies, and standards guide the actions needed for initiating or adopting zoning ordinances, subdivisions, and public improvements or Page 78 Kaʻū General Plan Community Meeting Page 4 projects. These actions must align with and implement the GP as required by the County Charter, Section 3-15. Other Q: What does kupuna have to say about the status of Punaluʻu in regard to the General Plan? (This question was posed to committee member Jesse Ke) A: Committee member Jesse Ke offered the following insights in response to this question. • Listen to what each party has to say. • We have the ability to communicate and work things out. • Community can sit down and focus on making things better rather than just saying “no”. • Simply saying “no” is not enough. It is important to explain the “why” behind the opposition. • Sacred sites of Punaluʻu should not be exploited. • Focus on what can we do in order to work toward solutions. Comment(s) Public Access • The shoreline area lacks public access. There are concerns with the State giving away shoreline areas. Page 79 South Kohala CDP Action Committee General Plan (GP) Questions and Answers Monday, September 23, 2024 Climate Change Q: With the rising population and increasing land prices, how are we going to manage and maintain our current resources? How is the plan going to implement what we need in the short term with our existing resources? A: The General Plan is the County’s policy guide for the long-range comprehensive development of the island. The GP is intended to guide the pattern of future development based on long-term goals. As a comprehensive plan, the GP is meant to be a broad framework for more specific planning. The plan is limited in the sense that it often relies on further implementation actions, such as zoning and budget ordinances, to move toward our goals and priorities. Land Use Q: Given the project location, how is it possible for ʻŌuli Farms to do agriculture? A: If the area of land is zoned A-5a (Agricultural 5 acres), the landowner is allowed by right to subdivide the land into five-acre parcels. This is considered by right entitlement – approval is granted because the zoning allows for it. Rezoning land is a process that goes through the Planning Commission and County Council. Q: What does Objective 14, “Maximize the use of Rural designated lands to preserve rural character and lifestyle,” mean? How does this apply to agricultural land and preventing the rezoning of agricultural land? A: The General Plan focuses on overarching land use while a zoning designation addresses specific uses. Objective 14 of the plan is intended to better support the General Plan Land Use (GPLU) Rural designation, as much of our island is considered rural. This objective does not involve rezoning agricultural land to a different zoning district. Q: Where does the language regarding “amending zoning districts” or “rezoning” come from and what does it mean? (Reference to page 98, Action 14.b) A: To amend zoning districts indicates a change in the County Zoning Code (Chapter 25). To better utilize the GPLU Rural designation, action 14.b states that a Zoning Code amendment is needed. Specifically, it speaks to the need to update the zoning districts Family Agricultural (FA) and Residential Page 80 South Kohala General Plan Community Meeting Page 2 Agricultural (RA) to align with the Rural designation and allow types of uses that are not currently permitted in these districts. Q: What is meant by retreats and lodges? (Reference to page 98, Action 14.a) A: Currently, there is a lack of clear distinctions between those two types of uses and we want to better define those terms. This would require us to amend the definitions in the Zoning Code. Q: Does the General Plan Land Use Resort designation include residential uses? A: Yes, there are residential uses within the Resort designation. The GPLU Resort includes a mix of visitor-related uses such as hotels, condominiums hotels, single-family and multiple-family residential units, golf courses, and other typical resort recreational facilities, resort commercial complexes, and other support services. Q: In the GP Land Use Map, the intersection of Kawaihae Road and Queen Kaʻahumanu Highway has been labeled as Urban Expansion. Why is it possible for ʻŌuli Farms to develop here? A: The decisions that are being made right now are based on the 2005 General Plan. In the proposed plan, we tried to reduce or more specifically define urban footprints. We reviewed existing development in the Urban Expansion designation to identify areas that are built or at capacity and assign consistent urban designations. As mentioned earlier, the Ouli property is zoned for 5-acre agriculture lots, so they are allowed by right to do that. Transportation and Infrastructure Q: Are petitions a viable source for things like the Waikōloa Village roundabout? A: Yes, petitions, questions, or comments regarding the Waikōloa Village roundabout may be submitted to the County Department of Public Works (DPW). Q: While the General Plan emphasizes important topics such as conservation, sustainability, and climate change, the question remains – how will we fund all of this? What aspects of the plan can be streamlined or removed? A: Implementation, including funding, is critical to achieving the goals and objectives set out in the General Plan. Implementation will rely on a combination of coordination actions by county departments, collaboration with state and federal agencies, community engagement, and strategic funding mechanisms. Funding for projects and initiatives comes from a range of sources including the County budget and Capital Improvements Program (CIP), which play a key role in funding infrastructure, public facilities, and other priority projects (e.g., roads, housing, water/wastewater systems). State and federal grants are an example of external funding that may fund large-scale Page 81 South Kohala General Plan Community Meeting Page 3 projects (e.g., disaster resilience initiatives, and transportation infrastructure). Public-private partnerships (PPP) and tax revenues are additional funding mechanisms that the County may pursue to implement projects and programs identified in the General Plan. Q: Can you clarify the ownership exchange of roads in Waimea? (Reference to Hwy 190 and Hwy 19) A: The State now owns certain roads in Waimea due to an exchange of roads that occurred in the County, which has also happened in other communities across the island. This exchange occurred in Waimea mainly so that the State has a complete route around the island. These roadways are also principal arterials, primarily managed by the State. Process and Implementation Q: When we give testimony, will it be recorded? A: Comments will be recorded and uploaded to the Planning Department's YouTube channel. Questions and comments will also be transcribed in written form and uploaded to the department website. The Planning Department will not be making any further adjustments to the draft plan at this stage. Currently, we are accepting public input until September 26, 2024. Afterward, the plan will move to the Planning Commission, where there will be another opportunity for public input before the commission makes its recommendations to the County Council for the final decision. YouTube recording: https://youtu.be/F7pTSCj1Ons?si=fvDoCGmAmijS9es0 Q: How was the General Plan sent out? A: The draft was made available through the Konveio website as well as on the Planning Department website. The Konveio platform is a powerful tool that allows people to comment directly on the plan and interact with other comments. Konveio also allows people to view and comment on the GP maps. Importantly the platform allows the Department to analyze the public feedback more efficiently. We have tutorial videos on how to use Konveio. For people who do not want to use Konveio, we have hard copies available at the Planning Department and all public libraries. Emailed or written comments have been accepted as well. Within the County, we maintain a listserv for various departments, allowing individuals to sign up for notifications about relevant updates. The draft was distributed across all listservs, accompanied by a press release, newspaper articles, and posts on social media. It was also shared with council members to pass along to their constituents. Page 82 South Kohala General Plan Community Meeting Page 4 Planning Department website: www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/general- plan-community-planning/gp Konveio: cohplanning.konveio.com/general-plan Q: Will my comments mean anything? Is it worth the effort to submit comments? A: All comments are important and treated equally. All comments received will be packaged and submitted to Planning Commissions to inform their review and recommendations. Q: In the future, will public notices include information on how the General Plan will affect the community? A: Press releases and public notices should include information on how the General Plan affects all of us. Staff will strive to include this type of information in public-facing materials. In past press releases from the Planning Department, we have included some context regarding the purpose of the General Plan and background information. We can improve on making this information more relatable to show the impacts on the average resident. Q: Who follows up or tracks the implementation progress of the 2005 General Plan policies and actions? A new plan is being proposed, but what happens to the previous plan? A: The current 2005 General Plan will remain in effect until a new plan is adopted. Progress and implementation status is reflected in the County’s Annual Budget Report. The Implementation section of the draft General Plan speaks more specifically to implementation, monitoring, and reporting going forward. Q: Did the Planning Department consult with cultural practitioners? A: Cultural practitioners have been involved throughout the process, including but not limited to, the Cultural Resources Commission, DHHL, and each of their communities, and various practitioners who have attended public meetings, workshops, or other individual/group meetings. Q: How can we trust something from 2005? There have been a lot of big changes from 2005 to now. This is just a piece of paper. We must move with the times, how is this plan going to help us do this? A: The proposed plan contains concepts that the 2005 General Plan did not account for. The final draft aims to be more integrative and holistic, introducing new sections including climate change, broadband, and integrated systems. The proposed draft also contains a section on community health and wellness, which is focused on integrating health into land use and infrastructure policies. Page 83 South Kohala General Plan Community Meeting Page 5 General Comments • Concerns with the General Plan being a template from ICLEI. • There is interest in more information regarding emergency preparedness. • Dissatisfaction with the Konveio platform and online commenting process. It is discouraging that people have to go online to read the General Plan. People who work do not have time to do that. • The general plan is difficult to read and understand, especially for kupuna. • Need to ask ourselves whether these things mentioned in the plan are needs vs. wants. • We need to consider everyone’s manaʻo and the General Plan needs to reach a broader spectrum of people. Addressing Climate Change for Island-Wide Health • There are concerns regarding the section on historic sites in the General Plan, particularly its limited understanding of South Kohala’s history. Native Hawaiian cultural practices in the region require greater attention, especially in preserving important sites in South Kohala. Protecting the viewsheds and puʻu is a key priority. There are also many concerns about the ʻŌuli Farms development. • There is interest in establishing a museum and archive in Waimea to preserve the area’s heritage. • Cultural legacy is lacking in the plan. • There is a great need for more habitat and ecosystem protection. Sustainable Development and Resilient Communities • Many concerns about infrastructure and there is opposition regarding development in South Kohala. • Affordability of land and increased taxes are key concerns for residents as many people and their families struggle to remain in Waimea. • The plan lacks adequate industrial land use designations, which are crucial for advancing utilities, transportation, and related services. • Concerns with redesignation of agricultural land in the proposed land use map. Transportation Access and Mobility • Concerns were raised regarding public access and trails. • The General Plan proposes seven roadway projects for Waikoloa. There is a request that we prioritize a single second road for Waikoloa Village. The community urgently needs just one road and there is not enough in the budget for seven projects. • Roundabouts are going to increase traffic. Public Utilities • There is inadequate water for development. Water is among the most pressing concerns. Page 84 South Kohala General Plan Community Meeting Page 6 • The South Kohala CDP is grounded in key values such as water, community, and safety. Water is one of the most critical issues, as Waimea’s kuleana is to protect and sustain the water resources of this area. Currently, there is insufficient capacity to meet the community’s water needs. The idea of “sustainable development” is challenged here, as everything upland (mauka) directly impacts the lowland (makai). Waimea is intrinsically connected to all things water related. Public Facilities and Services • The topic of health is limited in the plan. Page 85 North Kohala Advisory Group General Plan (GP) Questions and Answers Tuesday, October 1, 2024 Land Use Q: How much of the existing agricultural lands are proposed to be Conservation or Natural in the General Plan? (Reference to policy maps page 272 and page 264) A: Most of the lands that have shifted from Extensive Agriculture (less productive agricultural land) to Natural are in mauka areas, above 3,000 feet elevation, and much of these areas are heavily forested with native species. These native forest areas are critical to the health of our groundwater resources and water availability. Approximately 384,893 acres have been shifted to Natural across the island. While most are in upland forest areas, some are also in lava fields. It is important to note that Natural falls under agricultural land use, meaning agriculture can still be done on Natural designated lands. Over the years, we received feedback on improving the distinctions between different types of agricultural land uses, which explains the proposed Ag designations. This data comes from studies such as the University of Hawaiʻi at Hilo Agricultural Land Use Baseline (2015) and the subsequent update in 2020. As for proposed Conservation lands, most of the Conservation lands noted in the GP are already State Land Use Conservation. This means despite what the GP says, it is Conservation and falls under state jurisdiction. The proposed GP tries to better align the GP Land Use Conservation with State Land Use. Q: What happens to the landowners who own any agricultural land that has been redesignated in the GP Land Use Maps? A: The zoning would still be Agriculture, so the landowner still has the full entitlements and would still be able to use their land for agriculture. The GP does not change the county zoning. Q: What is Rural in the GP Land Use designations? A: The Rural designation is considered a transition type of land use between urban and agriculture. Rural areas are situated out of the designated Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). These areas retain rural character with low-density residential development and support small-scale commercial development and agricultural land uses. Q: Will North Kohala's growth management and affordable housing considerations appear in the General Plan? Page 86 North Kohala General Plan Community Meeting Page 2 A: The Planning Department will not be making any changes at this time – the draft as is will be presented to the Planning Commissions. All the feedback we receive will also be forwarded to the Planning Commissions. They will hear testimony, deliberate, and provide a recommendation to the County Council. Q: Why are Pōhakuloa lands in General Plan Land Use Conservation? A: The County does not have jurisdiction over federal lands, which is why these lands and uses are not discussed in the GP. However, the GP Land Use maintains Conservation for these lands, which at least helps to protect this land on a County level. Infrastructure Q: Clean water and waste management are critical to people living in any community. Major concerns: 1) bathrooms and sewer situation at Hapuna Beach. 2) The Kohala ditch stopped running a few years ago. This fed water to a lot of agriculture practices. How is this issue along with maintenance going to be addressed? A: At its core, the General Plan is broad and overarching and guides our land use settlement patterns. Guidance and direction are emphasized by the GP. Specific concerns are more directly addressed through agency functional plans. For example, wastewater issues are being handled by the Department of Environmental Management’s (DEM) Integrated Wastewater Management Plan. The Department of Water Supply (DWS) is working on its Water Use Development Plan for the county. The GP raises many of these complex challenges, and focuses on providing the policy direction for the county in handling these issues and setting the foundation for collaboration and coordination with other agencies. The GP also addresses asset maintenance through several of its policies and actions, primarily in the infrastructure sections of the plan. Q: What section of the General Plan discusses surveillance? Is there a section I can comment on? A: While the GP does not contain specific policies on surveillance cameras on traffic lights, anyone can comment on general traffic or transportation topics which are found in Section 4.2. The plan speaks generally to traffic and transportation policies that either help increase safety or aid in achieving our goal of reducing energy. The plan also discusses public utilities including telecommunications and broadband (Section 4.3.7), which is another place in the draft to leave comments regarding surveillance. Q: What are the current plans for being more proactive about the infrastructure before the GP can be implemented? Page 87 North Kohala General Plan Community Meeting Page 3 A: The GP is long-range and general as it speaks to future settlement patterns. Those plans you are referring to are the agency functional plans which often occur at the State level. For example, the Department of Transportation has long-range surface transportation plans. Currently, the County is working on its Hazard Mitigation Plan update, with Civil Defense being the lead agency. Two community groups are also addressing these issues. One is the Parks, Roads, and View Planes Group. They are looking at secondary roads and emergency uses of private roads such as Pratt Road. There is also the Trails and Connectivity Group, which meets quarterly. This group is looking at alternative uses of Akoni Pule Highway, either trails or bikeways. Nā Ala Hele is already looking into a grant that will help this community study this issue of emergency exits and auxiliary roads. (Response from North Kohala Advisory Group) Housing Q: With this plan, is there consideration for multi-use zoning, where we might have some availability for more commercial and smaller housing options for young adults? A: Yes, zoning regulations could be amended to provide for multi-family and mixed-use opportunities. Currently, commercial districts only allow for this (e.g., the fourplex behind L&L). We are pushing for zoning that would allow for multi-family and rental units. We are in support of housing for teachers and workers. We are also trying to change the rules with respect to agricultural workers on agricultural land. (Response from North Kohala Advisory Group) In general, the GP supports mixed-use uses to allow more commercial and a variety of housing options island-wide. Within Medium Density Urban (MDU), mixed-use zoning is allowed. That is where we would like to see Transit- Oriented Development (TOD) and Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND). In Kohala, there are very small areas proposed for MDU as compared to Hilo and Kona. Overall, the GP supports more mixed-use zoning with more and diverse housing and commercial opportunities. Process and Implementation Q: What does it look like when the General Plan is adopted and executed? In 2045, what does the community look like? A: The General Plan integrates various elements of the Community Development Plans (CDPs). The General Plan aims to foster growth in a way that is appropriate for each community. Environmental stewardship and protection of our natural and cultural resources are also key to the future of Hawaiʻi Island. The plan promotes local agricultural production and supports small farmers. In the future, we strive for greater self-sufficiency and a stronger and Page 88 North Kohala General Plan Community Meeting Page 4 more resilient local economy, reducing our dependence on imports. The plan calls for more walkable and livable communities across the island as well as housing and economic opportunities for everyone, especially our youth. Q: If we get our comments in late, will be they looked at and considered? A: Yes, comments submitted after the September 26, 2024 deadline will be considered and compiled in the package that will be forwarded to the Planning Commissions. We encourage the community to get their comments in as soon as possible, given that the Planning Department will need to submit this package to the Planning Commission at the end of the month. Q: How much of the county budget has been spent on creating this new plan? A: The development of the General Plan has mostly been done internally by Planning Department staff. A few consultants were contracted by the County to produce several reports and analyses to inform the plan. Q: Could you be specific on how people here today could comment on the plan? A: The quickest way for people to comment on the plan is to email the Planning Department at GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov. You may also write a letter and address it to the Planning Department’s Kona or Hilo office. Q: Once Planning gets input, how do they decide what to integrate or not integrate into the plan, and what role do the consultants play? A: Consultants do not decide what input is included in the plan. The consultants have provided expert reports, research, analysis, and other information. Planning staff works on developing the plan. Staff also collaborates with other departments and agencies when it comes to specific topics of the plan. For example, if we receive water-related comments, we discuss those with the Department of Water Supply. It’s a collaborative effort. We also look at some of the expertise reports, CDPs, and other plans. All comments matter. Not everyone agrees but it is all part of this important public process. There have been many opportunities to incorporate feedback. This is the Final Recommended Draft that will be going to the Planning Commissions, so please keep in mind that the Planning Department will not be making changes to the draft at this time. Q: What is the General Plan timeline? A: The Final Draft and all comments received will be packaged and submitted to the Planning Commission at the end of October. The first meeting is November 1 and the second meeting will be on November 4. Future Planning Commission hearing dates will be posted as they are confirmed. The Commissions have 5 months to make formal recommendations, which then Page 89 North Kohala General Plan Community Meeting Page 5 go to the County Council, who ultimately decides on adopting the plan. This is likely to be a long process. The maps will be part of these deliberations. Q: Transitioning to a sustainable economy will take a lot of money. Where will funds come from to pay for this? A: The GP’s Implementation section serves as a guide for carrying out the policies and actions of the plan. The plan does not lay out the financial details as it is not the document intended for that. The plan looks at different sources of funds and tries to prioritize the things that need to happen. The actions of the plan are things the County departments can act on. For example, one action is to develop and adopt an impact fees ordinance to aid in the expansion of public utility infrastructure. We are looking at how we prioritize projects, leverage opportunities across projects, and collaborate across agencies. For example, looking at a dual-purpose project such as a trail, between the Department of Parks and Recreation and the Department of Public Works. Funding maintenance is the other critical piece. The GP mentions asset management as an opportunity so that we are making sure the capital budget is not spent solely on deferred maintenance. General Comments • I think aquaculture needs to be delineated from agriculture. It will support agriculture. Cutting-edge aquaculture is recirculating aquaculture systems. It answers water shortage problems. It recirculates the water that is used for these production systems. It is high technology, but it needs to be implemented, and it needs to be implemented immediately. I think more attention needs to be given to aquaculture as a standalone application. I would like to see more endorsements for land use development for strategic aquaculture sites. The State (DLNR) has a lot of land that can be used for aquaculture development, such as aquaculture parks. I am here as a voice for aquaculture development in North Kohala. I have a plan that involves 52 acres of DLNR land. My plan is ready to be implemented and it is based on the large- scale culture of marine and freshwater microalgae that are upcycled to other systems. RAS stands for Resurveying Aquaculture Systems. The other important word is upcycle and an example of what upcycling would be is using marine algae that we’ve developed and shed some of that algae to feed shellfish. That’s an example of upcycling from one system to make another production system and it goes on from there. • There should be county plans for the topic of surveillance. If there are transportation regulations or guidance, then I would assume at a county level we might care. This is an opportunity for the county. We have the opportunity to make suggestions for our communities and ask, “How do we feel about that?” • The Kohala Hospital renovated their parking lot a few years ago and put up cameras that are pointed at several of their neighboring residents’ homes and several people Page 90 North Kohala General Plan Community Meeting Page 6 are unhappy about that. Nothing has been done and there is no policy on it. This is another example of something the county should have a policy and does not. • The CDP is critically important to the island, and yes, it takes 20 years to plan. But I think with this round it would be most helpful if you could figure out if there is an actual bonafide acceptable definition of affordable housing. Is it affordable? Is it low cost? Is it attainable? • What I would really like to do is be able to evaluate this plan and process because we have tons of problems that are not in this plan. We need the ability to see what we did right and how to integrate changes. I would also like to see the financial accountability being worked into this because we never get to see what taxes came in and what went out. That is a possibility we should put in the plan. • This (keiki) is the reason why we’re doing this 20-year plan, this (keiki) is who it will affect and all of his peers. I just want to address whoever’s going to be reviewing, that the real-life impact of our kieki. This should be the uniting inspiration and motivation. I just want to close on a beautiful note but on a strong note, that when County Council goes to make their decisions, these aren’t just words, these are lives. Page 91 Puna CDP Action Committee General Plan (GP) Questions and Answers Thursday, October 3, 2024 Land Use Q: Who is responsible for changing zoning? A: It is typically up to the property owner to apply for a change of zone. The General Plan does not change any landowner’s existing zoning. While the General Plan Land Use (GPLU) designations suggest the best and highest use of the land, the zoning remains the same. Q: The General Plan outlines the maximum allowable land use for a particular area. What does it mean when someone applies to rezone their land? A: When someone applies for a rezone, they are requesting to change the zoning district of their property to allow different uses within the framework established by the General Plan. The plan defines the upper limits of land use, and rezoning seeks to align specific property uses within those limits. Q: Why does the General Plan designate Waikōloa as a major city, along with Hilo and Kona, but not Puna, even though Puna has a larger population? A: Waikōloa is an urban area, whereas Puna is a more rural area in nature. The lots in Puna are more spread out, while urban areas like Waikōloa have denser populations and more concentrated development. This difference in land use and population density distinguishes urban areas like Waikōloa from rural areas like Puna. The General Plan’s population data is sourced from the latest Census Bureau data and how it defines urban areas. Q: Why is the term “stakeholder” used in the General Plan instead of “homeowners”? A: The term “stakeholder” in the General Plan includes both homeowners and non-homeowners. It is a broader term that encompasses everyone who has an interest in the community, not just those who own property. The definition is also included in the Glossary of the plan (page 19). Page 92 Puna General Plan Community Meeting Page 2 Housing Q: Can you explain the County’s current formula for affordable housing? Whose responsibility is it to adjust this? A: The County’s Office of Housing and Community Development (OHCD) is responsible for overseeing the definition of affordable housing in the County, but it is also driven by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The GP looks at affordable housing based on what is considered affordable and attainable for local residents. For further specifics on the formula, please refer to the guidelines from OHCD and HUD. General Plan Process and Implementation Q: Why was the year 2045 chosen, and can the General Plan be amended to address future needs? A: Yes, the General Plan can be amended after adoption. It is considered a living document that can evolve to meet changing circumstances. Typically, a comprehensive review is conducted 10 years after the plan’s adoption as part of the regular planning cycle. The date of 2045 was selected as a long-term planning horizon to guide growth and development. Q: Why doesn’t Hilo have a CDP? A: Given the process of adopting the General Plan, it may be considered that Hilo would better benefit from an urban development plan rather than a regional plan, although this is still to be determined. The latest Hilo CDP is dated 1975. Further, the greater Hilo area has several other planning documents and tools that other towns and regions do not have and that help to guide development in and around Hilo. These include but are not limited to: the City of Hilo Zone Map (HCC 25-8-33), Downtown Hilo Multimodal Master Plan, Banyan Drive Redevelopment Authority Plan, EnVision Downtown Hilo, Hilo Bayfront Trails Master Plan, DHHL Master Plans for each of its areas (like Panaewa and Keaukaha), University of Hawaiʻi at Hilo Master Plan, State Airport Master Plan, etc. General Comments • The General Plan lacks clarity, particularly in sections like 2.2 Biocultural Stewardship and 1.13 Incentive Private Land Management, which are difficult to understand. I disagree with some of the language in the plan, as I believe it could significantly impact the Big Island in the coming years. Our island’s resources and infrastructure must be prioritized, especially concerning water, roads, and the need Page 93 Puna General Plan Community Meeting Page 3 for a new landfill. Parking issues are also a concern. It’s crucial to address these existing problems before permitting any new development. • The General Plan contains a lot of idealistic language, using terms like “sustainability” and “conservation”. It seems to encourage people to move closer to cities rather than living on rural land. One concern is that if these policies to protect the land aren’t followed, the land could potentially be acquired. Small farmers, like me, are feeling the pressure due to rising taxes and the increasing hurdles we face. The County’s zoning regulations will particularly impact Puna, as we are required to prove that we operate as agricultural businesses. Many of us don’t sell our crops, we give them away. What we really need are food processing facilities to create shelf- stable products for export, which will require designated industrial lands. • One of the strengths of the General Plan is its broad approach. I particularly appreciate Objective 1, Policies 1.1 through 1.6. Holding the County accountable for grubbing and grading will be especially beneficial in Puna. It would be helpful to update the grubbing and grading policy to "review, update, and enforce" these activities, as this is not currently being done. • Innovation requires collaboration and creativity from everyone. Unfortunately, “sustainability” has turned into a top-down buzzword, often implying a form of control rather than genuine progress. These kinds of terms are diluting the purpose of the document. • This plan should be entirely rewritten. Terms like “stakeholder” and “clustered housing” are not appropriate and should be replaced with “homeowners” and “farmers”. Page 94 Hāmākua CDP Action Committee General Plan (GP) Questions and Answers Wednesday, October 9, 2024 Land Use Q: Is the term “NIMBY” (Not In My Backyard) going to remain in the plan? A: The term “NIMBY” is used to describe a common dynamic in land use planning, where opposition to development can sometimes arise based on proximity, even when projects may align with broader community goals or environmental sustainability. While we understand that the term can carry a negative connotation, particularly for those who advocate for environmental preservation, our intention is not to criticize community members or environmentalists who raise legitimate concerns. Rather, it serves as a reflection of the challenges we face in balancing different perspectives on land use decisions. The County respects and values the input of environmental advocates and others in the planning process. We included the term “NIMBY” to foster an open discussion about the complexities of land use, not to cast judgment on any group. It’s important to us that all voices, especially those advocating for environmental stewardship, continue to be heard and respected as we move forward with planning efforts that prioritize sustainability, cultural preservation, and community well-being. Q: How are the Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) Guidelines consistent with the Laupāhoehoe community? The community development planning process emphasized protecting the rural character of this area. (Reference to page 92, Table 21) A: TND guidelines are included in the GP as a resource to inform land use planning and encourage walkable, mixed-use communities that foster a sense of place. TND promotes pedestrian-friendly design, reduces reliance on cars, and enhances livability by incorporating public spaces and compact development patterns. The TND characteristics provide an option that could be applied in medium density urban (MDU), which is indicated by the darker orange in the proposed General Plan Land Use (GPLU) map below. Page 95 Hāmākua General Plan Community Meeting Page 2 Q: What does junior department store mean in the context of the TND Character Guidelines (page 92)? A: A junior department store is a smaller-scale department store that offers a more limited selection of merchandise compared to larger, full-line department stores. It typically focuses on key categories like clothing, accessories, and home goods, and may cater to a specific niche or demographic. In the context of Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND), junior department stores are relevant because they provide convenient access to essential retail services within walkable, mixed-use communities. By offering a range of goods in a compact format, junior department stores align with the TND goal of promoting local, accessible commercial options that support the everyday needs of residents without requiring long-distance travel, thus contributing to a more sustainable and cohesive neighborhood environment. Transportation and Infrastructure Q: What does the objective regarding reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) mean for the community? (Reference to page 116, objective 19) A: This objective supports the County’s transportation goal to improve multimodal options and increase connectivity across the island. This objective speaks more to county actions and does not take away the individual freedom of owning a vehicle. Reducing VMT can be achieved Page 96 Hāmākua General Plan Community Meeting Page 3 through various policies and actions that promote alternative modes of transportation, such as mass transit, bicycling, and walking. It involves collaboration among different departments and agencies to prioritize and design capital projects that support active transportation goals. The objective also includes making roadway designs more pedestrian-friendly and multimodal, updating traffic impact analysis requirements, and increasing community engagement around alternative transportation options. By implementing these strategies, the goal is to decrease dependency on personal vehicles, mitigate traffic congestion, and support sustainable transportation practices. Process Q: Will the County Council and Planning Commissions be allowed to make amendments to the plan? A: Chapter 16.1 of the 2005 General Plan outlines the process for the comprehensive review of the general plan. The Planning Commissions will review the plan and make recommendations related to amendments. The County Council ultimately adopts the general plan, but there have been recent questions discussed at Council as to their ability to make substantive changes prior to adoption. The general plan is intended to be a living document that can be amended. By way of example, the 2005 General Plan was amended in 2006 and 2007 to address and amend some elements that were not addressed when adopted in 2005. This process referred to as interim amendments is outlined in Chapter 16.2 of the 2005 General Plan. Q: What tool or formula is used to calculate “sustainability”? On page 32, one of its definitions is, “Strikes a balance among economic, social and community, and environmental priorities”. A: In the GP, sustainability is defined as achieving a balance among social, economic, and environmental priorities to ensure that current and future generations can thrive. This balance is not calculated through a one-size-fits- all approach but rather through careful consideration of the unique challenges and opportunities in each community, with a focus on long-term benefits. Communities island wide have expressed a desire to promote growth and development that supports the well-being of residents, protects our natural resources, and fosters economic resilience. Q: Define the term “stakeholder” and who are the stakeholders that are presenting these plans to the County? A: The final draft includes the definition of “stakeholder” on page 19 in the glossary of the plan: Page 97 Hāmākua General Plan Community Meeting Page 4 Stakeholder is any individual, group, or organization that has an interest or concern in a particular project, decision, or activity and can be affected by its outcomes. Stakeholders can include a wide range of entities, such as employees, customers, suppliers, investors, government agencies, community members, and non-governmental organizations. They can influence or be influenced by the objectives, policies, and performance of an organization or project. Effective stakeholder engagement and management are crucial for the success and sustainability of any initiative, as it helps ensure that diverse perspectives and interests are considered. The term is not meant to single out private entities or specific interests, but rather to emphasize that all individuals, communities, and organizations who have a stake in the future of Hawaiʻi County are considered part of the planning process. Q: As citizens, do we get to have a back-and-forth dialogue regarding what the County is presenting? A: Yes, as citizens, you absolutely have the opportunity to participate in discussions about the draft. Throughout the process, we have held public meetings, workshops, and open houses to gather input and ensure that community voices are heard. We continue to welcome feedback through written comments, public testimony, and direct interactions with Planning staff. As we move forward, we encourage you to stay involved in upcoming Planning Commission meetings. Your participation helps shape the future of the County, and we are here to listen and work together on this important plan. Q: What happened to the idea of private property in the constitution? A: The General Plan is designed to respect and uphold the constitutional rights of property owners while providing a comprehensive framework for future growth and development that benefits the community as a whole. The purpose of the GP is to guide long-term land use decisions in a way that balances the protection of natural and cultural resources, sustainable growth, and the health, safety, and well-being of residents. The plan is meant to be broad and sets the vision for the County’s future while working within the legal boundaries established by federal and state laws, including protections for private property and due process. Importantly, the GP does not override existing property rights. Any regulatory measures that may arise would go through transparent processes that include public input, consideration of property rights, and adherence to laws. Q: Does our public testimony matter? A: Yes, all public testimony and comments submitted (written and verbal) are important to informing the comprehensive review process. All comments and are treated equally. We are now in the process of preparing the Final Page 98 Hāmākua General Plan Community Meeting Page 5 Recommended GP for the Planning Commissions. All public input received will be packaged and submitted to the Planning Commissions. Next it will move to the County Council. Both the Commissions and Council will hold hearings and the public process will continue. General Comments • I reject the General Plan 2045 and shall not give my consent to accept or implement such a plan. It’s vague in my opinion and there’s a lot of non-transparency. One of the things that caught my attention as a part Native Hawaiian, is that you talk about our culture and how to protect it but they don’t say anything about who’s going to do it. Theres no identification of what experts that exist today that would have the ability to do that. There are only two areas in the plan where we talk about Hawaiian culture and things we protect. This plan violates the international laws as Hawaiʻi is under US military occupation since it was overthrown in 1893. • I would like to see the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights included at the beginning of the plan. As it stands, I reject the General Plan until it includes cannabis hemp as an agricultural economic engine and First Amendment spiritual sacrament. I watched the County destroy a very sustainable economy here. Marijuana eradication was proven to destroy the economy, eradicate cannabis and the people that grew it, and substituted meth and crime which still exist. The local culture has been harmed severely and newcomers are moving in. God bless everybody. I reject the UN and globalism and support local ideas. I think cannabis is why the best, safe, natural, and sustainable economic stimulus in 120 days we can have a multi-million dollar world famous cannabis harvest year like we used to. • I think General Plan 2045 is part of the Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. There’s a global ruling class that creates global problems so they can pedal global solutions that gives some power and wealth while making a [?]. • I thank you for your service in protecting our health and safety by guarding against federal overreach and corporate interests that seek to supersede those of your constituents. I have come to inform you that the approval of the Hawaiʻi County General Plan will constitute collusion with the dictates of the UN, the WHO, and the World Economic Forum and their unelected officiants. These are global agendas that far exceed their jurisdiction and do not address our dire local needs, best interests, or authority. The plan as an offshoot of set agendas runs contrary to and exceeds the bounds of our protected rights under the Constitution of the United States and the State of Hawaiʻi, the Bill of Rights, and the Hawaiʻi County Charter. Your approval of this plan would thereby be in breach of the public trust. Another reason to object this plan is because it will require all county departments to collaborate with the County Office of Sustainability, Climate, Equity, and Resilience (OSCER) as the lead agency to ensure the integration of the county’s goal of sustainability, climate, resiliency, and equity into all county operations and planning initiatives thereby possibly Page 99 Hāmākua General Plan Community Meeting Page 6 rendering null and void powers you all have at the present time or those of the lead agencies that we already have in place. The corporate interests and outside control measures that permeate both the content and language of this top-down UN plan are in breach of said constitutional rights. The use of deceptive terms like onsite, affordable and workforce units, buffer zones, clusters, or smart cities, stakeholders, climate change resilience, etc. reveal the UN stand in the authorship of Hawaiʻi’s General Plan. To approve this plan will justify our call for your immediate removal from the offices you hold to be replaced. We demand your due diligence and request the continuance of the public comment period. • Pg 111, policy 17.4. If this plan goes through and you fill out a land use application to build something on their property, you will have to identify if your property has an existing or potential active living corridor that should be incorporated into the county open space network. To me that’s taking away land. That needs to be rejected completely, this is wrong. The Constitution and Bill of Rights protected our property. We need checks and balances right, please read this and read precisely things are not labeled, they’re not titled, and the director is asking why more power. • My comments are on agriculture. I didn’t see in reading the plan that actually talks about promoting self-sufficiency. I also want to comment on plan B. This plan assumes the economy is going to be just like it was and there’s no plan B in here. Reading the specifics of the plan, I didn’t see anything that encouraged people to grow their own food. All I know is the law just passed last year that no one knew about until they got a notice from the tax bureau that said their ag taxes and the exemptions that they’ve been enjoying on their ag property for self-sufficiency will no longer apply. So, I think that should be front and center on this plan – how this island should grow food for food sake and security not for money. • I think everyone should object. We have serious issues with the General Plan. The property tax thing I think that pretty well woke a lot of us up that something happened a year ago that’s going to result in like all over the country 30-40% increases all over the country in property taxes. That’s not sustainable for us, that’s not helpful for us, that’s not in the best of the people that live on the islands. We’re all going through this “scamdemic” thing since 2019 – lockdowns and massive economic impact. We have the price of food doubling in our stores and the County Council has the audacity to say we should pay more taxes. I got an issue with that and I think everybody should have an issue with that. We have a crisis here of people not being heard. We don’t feel like we’re being heard. Not that they haven’t met the deadlines [or] that it hasn’t been out there. I only got my copy of the General Plan a month ago to review. There’s a lot going on. I’m trying to feed my family too and a lot of us are working our butts off trying to, but we have major issues. I’m offended that our input and all the input since July – I get it- there’s been input allowed prior to this time – my input hasn’t been allowed. This directly affects my life, it affects everybody in here and if all these public hearings since July have no impact on the final General Plan, then what are we doing? Page 100 Hāmākua General Plan Community Meeting Page 7 I move that there be an extension at this time for public input and that other versions of the plan be seriously considered because a lot has happened since 2015. • The plan doesn’t sound like it has been authored here. At least the majority of it sounds a lot like Montana’s General Plan, Idaho’s General Plan, General Plans all over the country and that’s not okay that global interests are dictating what happens, what’s best for us in Hawaiʻi. We need our time to have meaningful input on this plan. Please – we shouldn’t have to say please – we the people, all the power comes from the people. • This plan should be entirely rewritten. Terms like “stakeholder” and “clustered housing” are not appropriate and should be replaced with “homeowners” and “farmers”. • Page 118, “reduce vehicle miles traveled”. You told me this isn’t going to take away from rights, but reduce vehicle miles traveled – you can’t – we have the right to travel. It’s part of the Constitution and this is in our General Plan telling people that you’re going to reduce their miles traveled? That’s very concerning. The other thing is incentivize private land management practices that protect and enhance natural resources. So you’re telling us, this is about the possibility that you’re taking people’s land – you don’t tell us exactly you know where you’re going to be doing this. There are other things in here that are also extremely concerning and partly it’s about climate change. I want to know which one of you has researched climate change regardless of the fact that what is being said by the mainstream media. Did you know that almost 2,000 credential scientists, meteorologists, climatologists, geologists from around the world have signed a world declaration that you can look up. It states there’s no climate danger. Is Hilo underwater right now? Did you know there’s a patent for a hurricane direct that actually moves hurricanes and tornadoes and it is under US Patent [?]. It’s a US patent that literally states it can control the weather. They’ve been able to control the weather since the Vietnam War since the ‘60s. • The Earth is cooling down and if you want to know why this is happening, the reason why is because the stakeholders that run this country are invested in renewable energy. Do not put this plan through because this is not written by anybody on the Big Island. • I only recently found out about the General Plan and read it online. I was really disappointed that only a handful of people commented from our island of about 200,000 residents, which show very little awareness. I’m all for self sufficiency, food security, and taking care of the ʻāina. But I do not consent to this plan, as it’s just a few of you who are unelected making plans for all of us. Words used like cluster, stakeholder, sustainability are also used by United Nations Agenda 21 or 2030 and other general plans across the mainland and the world. I thought this was a non- binding agreement by the way. Page 101 Hāmākua General Plan Community Meeting Page 8 • Goals such as to acquire land and incentivize compliance through real property taxes for example are sneaking communist UN global governance to Hawaiʻi where the government owns all the land and propaganda and taxes are used to manipulate our behavior. This means our government is no longer working for we the people but working for the UN. Let’s educate ourselves on climate change by weather modification and geoengineering – these are real, you can look them up • Our current Big Island mayor is a member of ICLEI. It means International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives. The “I” stands for international so that is not local. The global UN agenda is being adapted at a state local and county level. People are now being aware and being hurt financially and emotionally by this plan and this plan is unconstitutional in my opinion. This plan should be rejected in its entirety. Come up with your own organic local based plan for our island. • The definition of sustainability, which is on page 32, how do we calculate the balance that is included in this definition? Is there a practical tool that you use to establish that balance? I’ve seen some formulas for that give voice to environmental concerns and kind of balance. • I live in Laupahoehoe and on page 92, the Traditional Neighborhood Guidelines, when I was reading the characteristics there was nothing that reminded me of my own community. I was very involved in the community development planning process and I think the overwhelming sentiment about that was for at least for Laupahoehoe area to retain the rural character of the community and I just wasn’t seeing that in the traditional neighborhood character guidelines. For example, I don’t even know what a junior department store is. I’m concerned about honoring the hard work that people did in the community development process and their desire to maintain the rural aspect of the community and I’m not really seeing that. • Just recently this year Governor Green put out a desire for half of the food eaten in Hawaiʻi comes from Hawaiʻi by 2035 and those farmers would love to do that. We would love to support [that] we’d love to grow food. Keep the plan simple. It’s really hard right now with 250-page General Plan and Heather Kimball’s three new bills and with the County Council raising our taxes. With the new UN amendments coming to the building department, which is really going to change how we build things here. We just need the government to get out of the way and then we’ll do it. I feel like farmers need a lawyer just to sort out all this simplicity and it’s driving us into poverty. It’s time to overthrow the government. • A lot of good work has been done, I think that all of us in this room can agree on a lot of what’s in this plan. This is what we all want – we want a more livable place, we want less expenses, lower taxes, and we want to work together with government. I have three comments I’d like you to consider adding to the plan. First, there should be a section under the introduction, something like public private partnerships that talks about existing property rights. I really appreciate you sharing that if you have an existing property that’s zoned a certain way, that you can keep doing what you’re Page 102 Hāmākua General Plan Community Meeting Page 9 doing. I think that would take a lot of the charge out of people’s perception that this is some kind of a thing that came out of the UN, which we all know the UN’s been talking about this our whole lives. We all know we need to reduce our expenses and different things but nobody wants to be told how to live. • An important thing to add is a section that talks about the Hawaiian Kingdom’s property rights, the United States property rights, and the Bill of Rights. You’ve got some recourses, due process. This is a General Plan and most of us are going to be gone while this thing continues to be implemented and other people that come after us are going to look at this and say well we’re going to change the zoning here because we can, it’s in the general plan. • The idea of and word “equity” should be stricken from this plan. It’s antithetical to meritocracy. The people who work for a living in this community are the people that need to be supported. Equity is a gray area. • There should be some comment made on if there are negative health consequences for microwave radiation which has to do with when you’re building urban areas they’re now blanketed with 4G and 4G LTE. 5G is not as bad as 4G and 4G LTE but we all have cell phones right, so we’ve all kind of given our consent that we want to have this ability with Wi-Fi. But the future for some people who are hyper electrosensitive is 2G and 3G talk and text only. So there’s no real comment about it. • Define the term “stakeholder” because it seems like outside stakeholders are determining and changing our quality of life. It seems like the people who live here do not have a say in their quality of life. • What happened to the idea of private property in the Constitution? Looking at an island with limited resources, we should be focused on self-sufficiency, growing our own food, sustainable agriculture, and animal husbandry. I’m concerned about all the regulations related to small farms. The regulations tend to put a ceiling on upward mobility so it just seems like the pressure is coming from above to squeeze out any creativity. Page 103 Public Comments Received via Email or Written Page 104 From: Moriah Kramer To: Surprenant,April Subject: Zoning Amendment needed for 2045 Map,University Heights and Haleohi"u Homesteads Date:Thursday,August 29,2024 1:12:44 PM Attachments: Screenshot 2024-08- 28 at 5.37.46 PM.pnq Aloha April ! Mahalo for giving me your direct e-mail address. I tried to comment on the map and it is not working so I was unable to flag it there. My home TMK is 373056026. 73-4126 Kanawai Place The three streets Kanawai Place , lmiike Place, & lmiloa Place are all in the University Heights Neighborhood with easement through that neighborhood via Kaalele Street then Kahuna A'o and would be cutting our community in half with the proposed Zoning. I also spoke with the neighbors in Kaalele Street called Kalaoa View neighborhood who are also in a dense neighborhood of predominantly Native Hawaiian &working families who should be in the Low density Urban zoning too. I included them in the attached map that I have outlined for clarity. I will also attach a map of the archeological site for TMK 373003010,showing that it should be preserved and hopefully PONC will acquire it . We will be submitting it shortly but any help is appreciated, it being for sale right now gives our community a sense of urgency. Mahalo NUI for your time and please call if there is anything I can do gathering neighbors signatures or that sort of thing. Moriah Smith Kramer Page 105 kWLiNICipaccocoo 1;:e----------iiiriC]aoMar- ri 11 Han Pfl ---Dd ImilE _, 1".... 11. 6".. .."1.1111.11312o11:0fl 1,c.'s 1X' 011mOIErl mai al —I E cogal ErEalweestran 4 1 ac2 gazzeosti 6eji 51 u couHeri Od QUIPIO 06 goiiiiii 01 ...S 411.I g g 1 AelloPg a 1 4 1 Kilapa e0 DO wow pfl 11• 14. 4.—___ Page 106 a c N N b7r. Q co i, oi 12 1 Iia fwb11AS CIO•i 4 ......... 6 i 11_t iii 2 t ECrpSatpN6 C* 1 i 1 f 3 i.:410 f : ---.' y, 161' 4; j f sl o i r 1 4 is cc t t ® 1.i.4. A Ij , •DRt ... 000gULtr• -,'rY J' II z.. • 0 fl} A 3 r via 62 I ti-',.. z....- X114" - 4: I g r 1 7tis 2mow 0-, 11 0 2IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII, -,,i r il14:4/,.. r'k11?:, t i t I z r 1 C6 I 1 1 ,.• If 9 r 111;....6, 0.-mt,e::N l' I I f 4. 444.41;77rocp i sig 0 . , I Ir, 111 / '(,) 11 5.I i 6 4 y Jy /w t _ y 4 ! ”. ' F ,, A .t, 0 1 / v 1m1J/° • 1rte: 46.1. a t @o t 1 g 1111 . , G,II PIC rvd4aI• _ ll p r I W OII A 1 AJ, •N Page 107 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2024 5:54 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Hilo Bayfront Trail Inc. comment on General Plan 2045 Final Draft Attachments: General Plan 2045 Final Comment Letter September 2024.pdf Please see attached comment on the plan. Thanks for the opportunity to comment and good luck moving forward with the plan. RON TERRY, Secretary Hilo Bayfront Trails Inc. 1Page 108 o g3, F o September 3, 2024 Honorable Mitchell Roth, Mayor, County of Hawai'i Honorable Heather Kimball, Chair, Hawai'i County Council Mr. Zendo Kern, Director, Hawai'i County Planning Department Coming soon... Dear Mayor Roth, Chair Kimball and Director Kern: to a park near you! Thank you for the County's effort in finalizing the Hawai'i County General Plan 2045 GP 2045). The refinements, expansions and modernizations in the proposed goals, objectives and actions relative to the 2005 Plan set a good course for managing the Hilo Bayfront Trails,Inc. actions of our County to improve the life of its citizens and protect what is importantBoardofDirectors: to U5. President: Matthias Kusch The Board of Hilo Bayfront Trails, Inc., appreciated the opportunity to comment on Vice President: the draft GP 2045. Our non-profit is now 12 years old, and we meet nearly every Andi Ellis month to advance the Trail and extensions of it. We are pleased that over half of the Treasurer ambitious Trail project has already been built, and we look forward to assisting the James Eller County on the remainder. As you know, we have expanded our mission beyond Secretary: completing the Trail to advancing the utility and safety of pedestrian and bicycle Ron Terry facilities throughout East Hawai'i, in keeping with Complete Streets, Vision Zero and Directors:Smart Growth principles. We know from talking with each of you as well as the Natasha Soriano projects this administration advances that you share our basic goals. Alan Ryan James Leonard We also know you would agree that there is ample room for improvement. We have Jesse Domian very little in the way of urban multimodal trails. Most of our County's streets lack Kehaulani Costa bike lanes and many lack even sidewalks. Our streets are unappealing and hazardous Leonard Bisel to bike or walk. There are also very few safe pedestrian or bicycle facilities connecting our scattered communities. The vicious circle of no facilities<*no walking/biking contributes to Hawai'i's epidemic of obesity, poor cardiovascular health and diabetes, along with isolation of the large proportion of the population that does not drive. The national surge in speeding and aggressive driving during the pandemic has not abated, and drivers in Hawai'i are killing or injuring pedestrians and bicyclists at alarming rates. While we cannot control the attitudes of individual drivers, through thoughtful design we can greatly influence their behavior. It has been demonstrated throughout the world that funneling cars is not the primary way that city streets contribute value to a community. Instead, the great social and economic wealth of our streets is because they host homes, foster businesses, and support people on the ground walking and biking, accessing parks and services, shopping and patronizing restaurants. If town streets are designed like highways, with the goal of moving cars as fast as possible, i.e., if they have wide lanes, uniform profiles, large turn radii, timed signals, no street trees, no curb extensions, and PO Box 10702 , Hilo , Hawai'i 9 6 7 2 1 www.hilobayfronttrails.or2 Our Mission: To create a multi-use trail through scenic downtown Hilo for the health and well-being of its people and visitors now and into the future. Page 109 inadequate or missing sidewalks and bike lanes, they become the hazardous, unappealing hybrid called a "stroad". These detract from the wealth of our streets and by extension, our towns. We need to avoid the bad design that leads to stroads and to convert existing ones to safe, vibrant streets that protect our citizens and promote real community value. Back to the General Plan. Upon review, we see that many of our suggestions were taken, and some were not. We appreciate the wording that you added in various places at our suggestion to move the Plan towards better accomplishing multi-modal goals. Rather than detail each section where we feel the Plan could have further advanced these goals, we would like to discuss the implementation actions in Section 6.4.4. After all, these are the most important part of the plan. We are intimately familiar with the fate of most government plans, which sit on the shelf or are very unevenly implemented. We urge the County to emphasize implementation of the following, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO HELP: 16a. Develop a comprehensive, island-wide multimodal transportation plan that identifies the location and operation of automobile, mass transit, bicycle, and pedestrian systems, in coordination with appropriate federal and state agencies. This is a critical element of any future transportation planning. It will be crucial to incorporate and build on the Downtown Hilo Multimodal Master Plan as part of this effort. 16c. Amend the County Code, Chapters 22, 23, and 24 to increase active transportation and accommodate emerging micro-mobility solution. Micromobility devices such as E-bikes, E-scooters, E-skateboards, etc. are rapidly increasing on the Big Island, as they are throughout the country. It will be good to get ahead of regulatorily accommodating this generally positive trend. 17.a Develop and adopt a program to establish public access to historic and modern active living corridors and facilities that provide an island-wide route and connect to major destinations. We strongly support this for residents and as part of sustainable tourism. 17.b Explore the potential of multimodal trails to serve as evacuation routes during emergencies. We are pleased that the GP 2045 was amended to incorporate this measures, as suggested by our partner Saman Dias of the Maui Bicycling League in her comment letter. It is unfortunate that long-planned multi-modal infrastructure was not yet ready during the August 2023 fire in Lahaina. The Maui wildfires have much to teach us, including how multi-modal trails can contribute to safety and resilience to disasters. These lessons are readily applicable to communities such as Waikoloa, PO Box 10702 , Hilo , H a w a i`i 9 6 7 2 1 www.hilobayfronttrails.or2 Our Mission: To create a multi-use trail through scenic downtown Hilo for the health and well-being of its people and visitors now and into the future. Page 110 Hamakua and Lower Puna. (Please see https://www.westmauigreenway.org/wmg- call-to-action.html) 19.a Continue to adopt the County Street design manual as the County's complete street design program/policy. We will be reminding our County's administration and council to adopt this so that consideration of complete streets is mandated prior to the design of County new road and road rehabilitation projects. 19.c Develop an active transportation plan to guide where complete street improvements should be focused and replace previous pedestrian and bikeway plans. We support this and also wonder how it dovetails with Item 16a. 19.d Identify all roles for interdepartmental collaboration in delivering a truly multimodal transportation system. Breaking down the silos is extremely important for implementing the GP 2045. It is very easy to forget this on a daily basis and we hope you incorporate collaboration in all decisions. Please include the public as partners when appropriate. 19.e Update traffic impact analysis requirements to include alternative evaluations to the level of service outcomes, such as vehicle miles traveled and alternative transportation metrics. We want to emphasize that the era of unquestioned priority of Level of Service (LOS) are truly over in progressive communities throughout the land, and it should be here as well. Moving cars as fast and efficiently as possible to achieve LOS A through Downtown Hilo is the exact opposite of what we need for safe, accessible and vibrant streets. Please require alternative evaluations in all TIARs reviewed by the Planning Department. 19.f Increase community engagement and education around active transportation and alternative transportation options. The CIP process and every County substantial road project should adopt this as a mantra, at the very beginning. 20.b Amend the County Code to promote connectivity and discourage neighborhoods with only one inlet or outlet. We strongly support this. Even where it may seem infeasible to provide additional vehicular access, pedestrian and bicycle access should be increased. PO Box 10702, Hilo, H a w a i`i 9 6 7 2 1 www.hilobayfronttrails.or2 Our Mission: To create a multi-use trail through scenic downtown Hilo for the health and well-being of its people and visitors now and into the future. Page 111 20.c Establish a corridor planning/management program that is data-driven and uses performance-based targets and outcomes. We encourage this and want to see the data available to the public. 20.e Adopt a Complete Streets ordinance. This is a critical requirement for complete streets to be advanced in the County in reality, rather than just proclamation. 22.a Amend the County Code to incorporate Vision Zero safety principles and Complete Street design principles. We encourage this. 35.c Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, and other stakeholders to increase funding sources for park, recreation, and trail development and maintenance. As a group that has authored four non-County grants along with private donations totaling more than $2 million to help build Hilo Bayfront Trails, we pledge to continue assisting the County and we applaud the commitment to partnering. 35.cc Expand active open recreational opportunities at the Pana'ewa Rainforest Zoo and Equestrian Center properties such as bike/walking trails, horse trails, dog- friendly trails, and other outdoor recreation that would complement the Pana'ewa complex. We support this. One important implementation item that we believe is missing from the GP 2045 is a commitment to an Urban Development Plan (UDP) for Hilo. Why is this important? The town of Hilo is unique of all regions on the island in that it lacks a modern CDP the last Hilo CDP dates from 1975). There is thus no mechanism to accomplish the intended functions of the CDP, which the GP 2045 says are to: 1. Translate the General Plan's broad statements and community development guidelines to actions specific to the planning area to address regional issues and opportunities. 2. Improve and advance communities and community resilience through the acknowledgment and development of community capacity. 3. Provide a process for citizens to engage in civic dialogue and contribute to the identification of community priorities. Citizens in Hilo frequently feel left out of the planning and project review process because of the lack of an Action Committee to monitor implementation of the PO Box 10702 , Hilo , H a w a i`i 9 6 7 2 1 www.hilobayfronttrails.or2 Our Mission: To create a multi-use trail through scenic downtown Hilo for the health and well-being of its people and visitors now and into the future. Page 112 General Plan. Again, we request that the County develop a Hilo UDP and that it be formulated to include an Action Committee. Just as with CDPs, nine volunteer residents from the Hilo area should serve as stewards of the UDP through facilitating implementation and recommending plan updates as needed. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Final GP 2045. Perhaps it is not too late to make some adjustments to improve our urban trail infrastructure and make our streets safe, inclusive and more effective for all. SPincceerely, N&t Ron Terry, Secretary Hilo Bayfront Trails, Inc. Cc: U.S. Representative Jill Tokuda; Amy Ford-Wagner; FHWA; Ed Sniffen and Laura Ka'akua, HDOT; DLNR Chair Dawn Chang and Na Ala Hele Advisory Council; State Representatives Chris Todd, Richard Onishi, Greggor Ilagan and David Tunas; State Senator Lorraine Inouye and Joy San Buenaventura; Hawai'i County Councilmembers Jenn Kagiwada, Sue Lee Loy, Michelle Galimba and Ashley Kierkiewicz; County of Hawai'i Windward and Leeward Planning Commissions Hawaii Bicycling League; PATH; Hawai'i Island Chamber of Commerce; Japanese Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Hawai'i; Kona-Kohala Chamber of Commerce; Hawai'i Public Health Institute; Ulupono Initiative PO Box 10702, Hilo, Hawai'i 9 6 7 2 1 www.hilobavfronttrails.or2 Our Mission: To create a multi-use trail through scenic downtown Hilo for the health and well-being of its people and visitors now and into the future. Page 113 DeVera, Ashley From: janice glennie < Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 10:25 AM To:Planning Internet Mail Subject: Re: REMINDER: GENERAL PLAN WEBINAR WORKSHOP 9/5/24 Aloha planners, To reiterate, these GP presentations haven't been, to date, "workshops" as one would imagine. I ask that you please reserve that label for the real thing as it gets everyone excited and then let down when they realize they're not hands-on interactive gatherings as the term implies. Btw, my feedback isn't intended to give anyone a hard time. It's meant to help improve democratic participation and outcomes. Mahalo and best, Janice On Sep 4, 2024, at 8:33 AM, Hawaii County, HI <noreply@hawaiicounty.gov>wrote: REMINDER: GENERAL PLAN WEBINAR WORKSHOP 9/5/24 Date:09/04/2024 7:46 AM Join us for the General Plan Public Engagement workshops and community meetings across Hawai'i Island! Share your input and help shape the future of our communities. Register in advance for the September 5th Online Webinar: https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN IQ49gu9TTrgRMI4PDN-eEQ Upcoming Community Meetings: September 17, 2024, South Kona at 5:00pm - Rodney Yano Memorial Hall: 82-6145 Mamalahoa Hwy, Captain Cook, HI 96704 September 19, 2024, Ka'u at 5:00pm- Ka'u District Gym Multi-Purpose Room: 96-1219 Kamani St, Pahala, HI 96777 September 23, 2024, South Kohala at 5:00pm - Kuhio Hale: 64-756 Mamalahoa Hwy, Waimea, HI 96743 October 1, 2024, North Kohala at 4:30pm-Old Judiciary Building: 54-3900 Akoni Pule Hwy, Kapa'au, HI 96755 October 3, 2024, Puna at 5:00pm - Pahoa Community Center: 15-3022 Kauhale St. Pahoa, HI 96778 1Page 114 October 9, 2024, Hamakua at 5:00pm- Kula'imano Community Center: 28-2892 Alia Street Pepe'ekeo, HI 96783 Public Comments: September 26, 2024: Public comments for this phase are due,following the guidelines set out by the current 2005 General Plan,which indicates the public will have 21 days after the last workshop to share their comments with the Planning Director. [2005 GP 16.1(5)] Once this period ends,the Final Recommended Draft in its current form and all public comments will be packaged and submitted to the Windward and Leeward Planning Commissions. November 2024: Planning Commission Public Hearings. Specific dates will be added once available. Upon the submission of the Final Recommended Draft to the Windward and Leeward Planning Commissions, each commission will have 150 days to review and provide their recommendations to the County Council. [2005 GP 16.1(8)] April 2025: County Council Public Hearings. Specific dates will be added once available. Change your eNotification preference. Unsubscribe from all Hawaii County,HI eNotifications. 2Page 115 DeVera, Ashley From: jlkinkona < Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 1:17 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Webinar Workshop Questions Questions for webinar workshop on 9/05/2024: On page 295 of GP2045, the Wildfire Risk Area Map indicates a HIGH RISK RATING for the area along the coastline between Kailua Kona town and Keauhou. I happen to live in this area. 1)When was this rating made? Was it made before the Lahaina fire? Or after the Lahaina fire? 2)What criteria did you use to determine that this area was high risk for wildfires? In the 36 plus years that I have lived in this area, I only know of a few house fires and about less than 5 brush fires but it definitely had a lot fewer fires and way less threatening fires than Waikoloa and yet Waikoloa is rated as medium risk? How did that happen? 3) Is a transportation corridor(Alii Highway) still planned for this area? 4) Have you notified residents and homeowners in this area that they now live in a high risk area for wildfires? 5) How will this affect my house insurance? Sent with Proton Mail secure email. Page 116 DeVera, Ashley From: Planning General Plan Sent: Friday, September 6, 2024 3:54 PM To:Chuck Flaherty Cc: Planning - Long Range Admin; Planning General Plan; Planning Internet Mail Subject: RE: Questions for today's General Plan webinar Aloha Chuck, Thankyou for your questions. Below we provide some answers and input in blue. Thankyou for your continued engagement in this process. Mahalo, General Plan Team County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 I Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone: (808)961-8288 I Email:GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov Website:www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov o tin County of Hawai'i General Plan 2045414;•$ Planning for a Sustainable Future Or Project Website:cohplanning.konveio.com From: Chuck Flaherty< Sent:Thursday, September 5, 2024 8:52 AM To: Planning- Long Range Admin <longrangeadmin@hawaiicounty.gov>; Planning General Plan generalplan@hawaiicounty.gov>; Planning Internet Mail <planning@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Questions for today's General Plan webinar Aloha, Please see my questions below. Mahalo, Chuck Flaherty Note #1: the draft General Plan 2045 released last Sept. 2023= 9/23 draft GP, the draft GP2045 released in July 2024 = 7/24 draft GP. Note #2: Questions 1-12 relate to the General Plan Comprehensive Review process itself. Questions 13-21 relate to content involving a new section of the draft GP2045 and a new term, "Biocultural Stewardship". Page 117 1. Why was the zoom link for today's online webinar not e-mailed to prior participants in the General Plan Comprehensive Review until yesterday? We posted the link to the website and in social media posts. A reminder was sent out yesterday. We had over 120 people who preregistered. 2. Given the General Plan Comprehensive Review specifically requires the Planning Department conduct "public workshops", what is the Planning Department's definition of a workshop? There is no specific definition of workshop, but given it is the term used in the 2005 GP chapter 16 related to the comprehensive review process, we are using the same term. As answered in the webinar last night, early on in the process we did more technical and subject matter workshops and charrettes that were more interactive. Then later in the process, we held open house style workshops with subject matter stations and staff/agency representatives to talk story and answer questions one-on-one with participants. This style was chosen because the public can engage directly with staff to get more information, and we have found over the years that we receive many more comments from the public this way. We have been hearing for the last year to have more of presentation style and this lends itself to presenting the final recommended draft as we have done last and this week. 3. Why wasn't Ramseyer formatting used to show changes between the 9/23 draft GP2045 and the 7/24 draft GP when the two are substantially the same, thereby once and again forcing the public to play seek-and-find for changes? We did a little reorganizing (like shifting the biocultural section to the front). We also shifted a few policies around based on comments and caught a number of mistakes or errors that were corrected. Providing this in Ramseyer format would have been more confusion for most members of the public. 4. Given all goals, policies, standards, and courses of action in the current General Plan were reviewed and evaluated for inclusion in the draft 9/23 and 7/24 GP2045s, why does the General Plan Policy Rationale not identify the specific goals, policies, standards, and courses of action that were or were not included in the draft GP2045s, thereby enabling the general public and decision-makers to determine whether or not they agreed with the Planning Director's recommendations? Although many policies came from the 2005 GP, CDPs, and other planning documents, not all are verbatim, and this was ultimately developed as a new plan that does not lend itself to the Ramseyer style of revisions. It basically would have been a deletion of the old plan and insertion of the new, which would not be helpful. There is also a lot of information in the CDP's regionally that is no longer needed in the GP. Otherwise, they would continue to be redundant. It is very common in the planning profession to overhaul a long-range planning document, revisit all aspects, and rewrite and replace it with a new document. This has been done recently in Kauai and before that Maui. There are countless examples across the country. 5. Why doesn't the Planning Department have a list of the changes between the current GP land use map and the 7/24 draft GP2045 with the location of each change clearly identified and the reason for each change, especially given the Planning Dept could not have prepared the draft GP2045 without having produced this information? 2Page 118 Map changes were made based on CDPs and criteria outlined in the methodology reports, which substantiate the change proposed. They were done in an electronic map via GIS that merges many different layers including old and current parcel data, 2005 LUPG, many of which are noted on the disclaimer of the extensive list of polygons provided under the UIPA request. Not all land use designations follow TMK boundaries and there can be many polygons within 1 parcel. So, it is not as simple as you might prefer to provide the information you want in today's world of technology. 6. Why were the number of detailed land use maps reduced from 24 in the current GP to 6 in the 7/24 draft GP, thereby making it effectively impossible to compare printouts from the current GP .pdf with printouts from the 7/24 draft GP .pdf? To simplify the document itself given that the data will always live and be available electronically, which further allows people to zoom in and out as needed for their specific use. 7. Given it is impossible to see the .pdf printout of the land use maps, why does the online Konveio software platform prevent the online map from being copied and printed, thereby impeding analysis and research on changes between the land use maps? The Konveio site does not have a printing function for the GIS map. You could zoom in and use the Print Screen function on your computer. 8. Why does the online Konveio software platform prevent text within the 7/24 draft GP from being copied and printed? This forces people to download the .pdf copy and then switch back- and-forth between the online version when preparing comments using key word searches in the online version and then having to copy and paste from the . pdf copy. The Konveio site does not have a printing function. It is designed to be interactive electronically. If you require a hard copy, we can send one to you. 9. Why were all comments made on the online Konveio platform Sept 2023 GP2045 removed? They have been captured word for word and provided as reports linked here. The 2023 comments would not be able to translate over to a new draft document. 10. How do people who made comments on the Sept 2023 map know whether or not their comments were addressed in the July 2024 draft GP2045? We incorporated as many comments as we could maintaining generally consistency with process and criteria noted in the methodology reports. As noted in the workshop we always have to balance different perspectives and opinions about what individuals may desire. 11. Why doesn't the Planning Department have a list of the changes between the current GP land use map and the July 2024 GP2045 which clearly identifying the location of each change and the reason for each change, especially given the Planning Dept could not have prepared the draft GP2045 without having produced this information? We have just uploaded an interactive map on the General Plan project website, which we link below. It shows all areas that have proposed changes to the land use in a color and all areas that have not changed as white. Like the land use map, there is a pop-up information box that appears when you click on a polygon. General Plan Land Use Change Map is linked here. 3Page 119 12. Why have all lines delineating privately-owned TMKs in the 9/23 GP2045 online land use map been removed from the 7/24 draft GP2045 map when that same information is available online through the tax assessor's office? I'm not sure what you are referring to. I do not recall that we provided a distinction between public and private parcels. I will have to inquire about this. In the interactive map when a parcel or polygon is clicked, an information window appears and one of the items is "Link to Property Assessment" which goes to the RPT website and shows the owner. 13. Why are following essential terms used in the state constitution and in state Supreme Court legal precedent scarcely mentioned and. when mentioned, not stated within the context of the legal operating environment in which the General Plan exists? Public trust", page 39, Biocultural Stewardship Challenges, "The county has a limited budget for its large-scale geographic responsibility for the protection of public trust natural and cultural resources." 14. Why is budget a limiting factor when policies, procedures, and processes are the methods by which the county carries out its affirmative duty to protect the public trust? This is noted as a challenge because budget is often a limiting factor with a lot of things the county may want or need to implement. Our island is very large and has relatively low tax revenue per area as a whole. Most policies and procedures are implemented through some process that requires funding. Public trust", page 40, Biocultural Stewardship Opportunities", "The county can take a more proactive role in exercising its protective public trust role for natural and cultural resources." 15. Why is this an "opportunity" when it should be policy, such as "The county has affirmative duty throughout any decision-making process to protect the county's environmental and cultural resources."? Many of the policies in the biocultural chapter are related to different elements of public trust without using the term specifically each and every time, such as protection of forests, watersheds, groundwater recharge, riparian and natural environments, etc. Public trust", page 41, Biocultural Stewardship Policy 1. 1, "Minimize and mitigate significant impacts, such as degradation, incompatible uses, or other threats to Native Hawaiian habitats and public trust resources." 16. Why are cumulative impacts not addressed as required in Hawai'i Revised Statutes 343? Cumulative impacts are inherent in the policy language. Feel free to add a comment to add cumulative to the language. 17. Why is there no "Action" for protecting the public trust in the 7/24 draft GP? Again, there are many actions related to public trust without using the term, such as preservation of wetland, native species, wildlife, rivers, coastal waters, and other noted above. 18. Why is there no mention of the term "affirmative duty" in the 7/24 draft GP, when the state Supreme Court has ruled the county has an affirmative duty to protect public trust resources, which includes kanaka maoli resources, at every stage of any decision-making process? 4Page 120 Using such terminology is not required as stated in a court case. Per notes above, the plan does address the counties public trust. 19. Why is there no mention of the term "Precautionary principle" in the 7/24 draft GP, given the state Supreme Court has this principle must be followed all decision-making processes ensure protection of the public trust? Again, notations in a court ruling does not require that we use the exact language. Traditional and customary practices", Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship, p. 47, p. 234, Action 4.g., "Continue the dialogue between State and County agencies to identify guidance to protect Native Hawaiian customary and traditional practices." 20. Given county agencies have a policy of delegating all responsibility for the protection of Native Hawaiian cultural resources, as well as traditional and customary practices, to the state and there is no "dialogue between State and County agencies, why does the Planning Director believe this to be a valid action"? Traditional and customary practices", Land Use, p. 80, p. 237, Action 10.c, "Collaborate with the State Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (OPSD) to create criteria to help identify and protect Native Hawaiian customary and traditional practices." see question 20. Above The county and state agencies do have dialogue, and this should be continued and even improved. In striving to improve stewardship, it is critical that the county collaborate with other state agencies like DLNR and OPSD to ensure consistency in how HRS is interpreted and implemented. Historic trails", Transportation, p. 111, Policy 17.5, "Ensure that existing active living corridors that are publicly owned or available by easement are properly identified and that their access elements are secured and documented. a) Primary examples include but are not limited to historic trails and roads, roads-in-limbo, 'paper roads', former sugar cane roads, train infrastructure remnants (Rails to Trails), and pedestrian and bicycling paths." 21. Given the list of references includes "93., The Daily Bulletin (1892). The Highways Act, 1892.", why is there no policy acknowledging that all trails, paths, and roads in existence when the Highways Act of 1892 was passed are public right-of-ways owned by the state? Because the Highways Act already does that, it is unnecessary for the GP to say it again. 22. Why is there no action stating that the county must protect these public right-of-ways throughout all decision-making processes? Action17.a would address including ROW from the Highways Act. "Develop and adopt a program to establish public access to historic and modern active living corridors and facilities that provide an island- wide route and connect to major destinations." Further, the Highways Act gave ROW to the state which differs from county ROW. In this action, we seek to create a network of trails that can include these historic trails. 5Page 121 DeVera, Ashley From: Donna Koniecki < Sent: Friday, September 6, 2024 5:47 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Re: General Plan Engagement and Updates Mahalo and Aloha! I did not get to finish your survey before the meeting started. I lived in the Kona side for 25 years, moving to Hilo in 2022, and had participated in several community meetings since 2015. Unfortunately, I missed the August 29 meeting in Hilo. I look forward to seeing more in-depth recommendations. On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 4:28 PM General Plan Team <GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov>wrote: General Plan Engagement and Updates Date: 09/ 06/2024 1:35 PM Mahalo nui to all who have attended and participated in the recent General Plan Workshops! We are pleased to share that the recordings from these General Plan workshops are now available: In-Person Workshop Recording-August 29, 2024 [Click here for link] Webinar Workshop Recording-September 5, 2024 [Click here for link] Additionally, a Land Use Change Map is now available for viewing. This interactive map highlights all areas with proposed land use changes in color,while unchanged areas are shown in white. By zooming in and clicking on a polygon,you can view detailed information, including parcel number, changes from the 2005 LUPAG to the 2024 GPLU, state land use, and zoning district. The map can also be accessed directly from the interactive website here and click on "Change Map" in the menu bar. Swipe Tool for Comparison The "swipe" tool( °') offers another way to see changes between the 2005 and 2024 maps. This feature is available on both the Change Map and GP Maps. To use it, simply click the swipe tool located on the left side of the map. A vertical bar will appear, allowing you to slide it side to side for a clear comparison. Page 122 The Final Recommended 2024 General Plan Land Use (GPLU) Map can be found here: [Click here for link] Thank you for your continued engagement. Should you have any questions, feel free to reach out. Change your eNotification preference. Unsubscribe from all Hawaii County, HI eNotifications. 2Page 123 DeVera, Ashley From: Chuck Flaherty < Sent: Saturday, September 7, 2024 8:05 AM To:Planning General Plan Cc: Planning - Long Range Admin; Planning Internet Mail Subject: Re: Questions for today's General Plan webinar Aloha General Plan team, Mahalo for providing answers. I will follow-up on the information and procedures to access and review the GP2045. The 1989 and 2005 had language that was legally enforceable. It appears draft GP2045 has been sanitized" to avoid legal exposure moving forward. This would be consistent with the strategy the Planning Department used in 2019 to remove "shall" and "should" from the Kona CDP after the county lost the Missler v. County of Hawaii and was awarded attorney fees and costs against the Planning Director. Malama pono, Chuck On 2024-09-06 21:54, Planning General Plan wrote: Aloha Chuck, Thank you for your questions. Below we provide some answers and input in blue. Thank you for your continued engagement in this process. Mahalo, General Plan Team County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 I Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone: (808) 961-8288 I Email: GeneralPlan©hawaiicounty.gov Website: www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov xi xi 0 0 I County of Hawai'i General Plan 2045 1Page 124 Planning for a Sustainable Future Project Website: cohplanning.konveio.com From: Chuck Flaherty< Sent:Thursday, September 5, 2024 8:52 AM To: Planning- Long Range Admin <longrangeadmin@hawaiicounty.gov>; Planning General Plan generalplan@hawaiicounty.gov>; Planning Internet Mail <planning@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Questions for today's General Plan webinar Aloha, Please see my questions below. Mahalo, Chuck Flaherty Note #1: the draft General Plan 2045 released last Sept. 2023= 9/23 draft GP, the draft GP2045 released in July 2024 = 7/24 draft GP. Note #2: Questions 1-12 relate to the General Plan Comprehensive Review process itself. Questions 13-21 relate to content involving a new section of the draft GP2045 and a new term, "Biocultural Stewardship". 1. Why was the zoom link for today's online webinar not e-mailed to prior participants in the General Plan Comprehensive Review until yesterday? We posted the link to the website and in social media posts. A reminder was sent out yesterday. We had over 120 people who preregistered. 2. Given the General Plan Comprehensive Review specifically requires the Planning Department conduct "public workshops", what is the Planning Department's definition of a workshop? There is no specific definition of workshop, but given it is the term used in the 2005 GP chapter 16 related to the comprehensive review process, we are using the same term. As answered in the webinar last night, early on in the process we did more technical and subject matter workshops and charrettes that were more interactive. Then later in the process, we held open house style workshops with subject matter stations and staff/agency representatives to talk story and answer questions one-on-one with participants. This style was chosen because the public can engage directly with staff to get more information, and we have found over the years that we receive many more comments from the public this way. We have been hearing for the last year to have more of presentation style and this lends itself to presenting the final recommended draft as we have done last and this week. 2Page 125 3. Why wasn't Ramseyer formatting used to show changes between the 9/23 draft GP2045 and the 7/24 draft GP when the two are substantially the same, thereby once and again forcing the public to play seek-and-find for changes? We did a little reorganizing (like shifting the biocultural section to the front). We also shifted a few policies around based on comments and caught a number of mistakes or errors that were corrected. Providing this in Ramseyer format would have been more confusion for most members of the public. 4. Given all goals, policies, standards, and courses of action in the current General Plan were reviewed and evaluated for inclusion in the draft 9/23 and 7/24 GP2045s, why does the General Plan Policy Rationale not identify the specific goals, policies, standards, and courses of action that were or were not included in the draft GP2045s, thereby enabling the general public and decision-makers to determine whether or not they agreed with the Planning Director's recommendations? Although many policies came from the 2005 GP, CDPs, and other planning documents, not all are verbatim, and this was ultimately developed as a new plan that does not lend itself to the Ramseyer style of revisions. It basically would have been a deletion of the old plan and insertion of the new, which would not be helpful. There is also a lot of information in the CDP's regionally that is no longer needed in the GP. Otherwise, they would continue to be redundant. It is very common in the planning profession to overhaul a long-range planning document, revisit all aspects, and rewrite and replace it with a new document. This has been done recently in Kauai and before that Maui. There are countless examples across the country. 5. Why doesn't the Planning Department have a list of the changes between the current GP land use map and the 7/24 draft GP2045 with the location of each change clearly identified and the reason for each change, especially given the Planning Dept could not have prepared the draft GP2045 without having produced this information? Map changes were made based on CDPs and criteria outlined in the methodology reports, which substantiate the change proposed. They were done in an electronic map via GIS that merges many different layers including old and current parcel data, 2005 LUPG, many of which are noted on the disclaimer of the extensive list of polygons provided under the UIPA request. Not all land use designations follow TMK boundaries and there can be many polygons within 1 parcel. So, it is not as simple as you might prefer to provide the information you want in today's world of technology. 6. Why were the number of detailed land use maps reduced from 24 in the current GP to 6 in the 7/24 draft GP, thereby making it effectively impossible to compare printouts from the current GP .pdf with printouts from the 7/24 draft GP .pdf? To simplify the document itself given that the data will always live and be available electronically, which further allows people to zoom in and out as needed for their specific use. 7. Given it is impossible to see the .pdf printout of the land use maps, why does the online Konveio software platform prevent the online map from being copied and printed, thereby impeding analysis and research on changes between the land use maps? The Konveio site does not have a printing function for the GIS map. You could zoom in and use the Print Screen function on your computer. 8. Why does the online Konveio software platform prevent text within the 7/24 draft GP from being copied and printed? This forces people to download the .pdf copy and then switch back- and-forth between the online version when preparing comments using key word searches in the online version and then having to copy and paste from the . pdf copy. 3Page 126 The Konveio site does not have a printing function. It is designed to be interactive electronically. If you require a hard copy, we can send one to you. 9. Why were all comments made on the online Konveio platform Sept 2023 GP2045 removed? They have been captured word for word and provided as reports linked here. The 2023 comments would not be able to translate over to a new draft document. 10. How do people who made comments on the Sept 2023 map know whether or not their comments were addressed in the July 2024 draft GP2045? We incorporated as many comments as we could maintaining generally consistency with process and criteria noted in the methodology reports. As noted in the workshop we always have to balance different perspectives and opinions about what individuals may desire. 11. Why doesn't the Planning Department have a list of the changes between the current GP land use map and the July 2024 GP2045 which clearly identifying the location of each change and the reason for each change, especially given the Planning Dept could not have prepared the draft GP2045 without having produced this information? We have just uploaded an interactive map on the General Plan project website, which we link below. It shows all areas that have proposed changes to the land use in a color and all areas that have not changed as white. Like the land use map, there is a pop-up information box that appears when you click on a polygon. General Plan Land Use Change Map is linked here. 12. Why have all lines delineating privately-owned TMKs in the 9/23 GP2045 online land use map been removed from the 7/24 draft GP2045 map when that same information is available online through the tax assessor's office? rn not sure what you are referring to. I do not recall that we provided a distinction between public and private parcels. I will have to inquire about this. In the interactive map when a parcel or polygon is clicked, an information window appears and one of the items is "Link to Property Assessment" which goes to the RPT website and shows the owner. 13. Why are following essential terms used in the state constitution and in state Supreme Court legal precedent scarcely mentioned and. when mentioned, not stated within the context of the legal operating environment in which the General Plan exists? Public trust", page 39, Biocultural Stewardship Challenges, "The county has a limited budget for its large-scale geographic responsibility for the protection of public trust natural and cultural resources." 14. Why is budget a limiting factor when policies, procedures, and processes are the methods by which the county carries out its affirmative duty to protect the public trust? This is noted as a challenge because budget is often a limiting factor with a lot of things the county may want or need to implement. Our island is very large and has relatively low tax revenue per area as a whole. Most policies and procedures are implemented through some process that requires funding. Public trust", page 40, Biocultural Stewardship Opportunities", "The county can take a more proactive role in exercising its protective public trust role for natural and cultural resources." 15. Why is this an "opportunity" when it should be policy, such as "The county has affirmative duty throughout any decision-making process to protect the county's environmental and cultural resources."? 4Page 127 Many of the policies in the biocultural chapter are related to different elements of public trust without using the term specifically each and every time, such as protection of forests, watersheds, groundwater recharge, riparian and natural environments, etc. Public trust", page 41, Biocultural Stewardship Policy 1.1, "Minimize and mitigate significant impacts, such as degradation, incompatible uses, or other threats to Native Hawaiian habitats and public trust resources." 16. Why are cumulative impacts not addressed as required in Hawaii Revised Statutes 343? Cumulative impacts are inherent the policy language. Feel free to add a comment to add cumulative to the language. 17. Why is there no "Action" for protecting the public trust in the 7/24 draft GP? Again, there are many actions related to public trust without using the term, such as preservation o' wetland, native species, wildlife, rivers, coastal waters, and other noted above. 18. Why is there no mention of the term "affirmative duty" in the 7/24 draft GP, when the state Supreme Court has ruled the county has an affirmative duty to protect public trust resources, which includes kanaka maoli resources, at every stage of any decision-making process? Using such terminology is not required as stated in a court case. Per notes above plan does address the counties public trust. 19. Why is there no mention of the term "Precautionary principle" in the 7/24 draft GP, given the state Supreme Court has this principle must be followed all decision-making processes ensure protection of the public trust? gain, notations in a court ling does not requi that we use the exact language. Traditional and customary practices", Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship, p. 47, p. 234, Action 4.g., "Continue the dialogue between State and County agencies to identify guidance to protect Native Hawaiian customary and traditional practices." 20. Given county agencies have a policy of delegating all responsibility for the protection of Native Hawaiian cultural resources, as well as traditional and customary practices, to the state and there is no "dialogue between State and County agencies, why does the Planning Director believe this to be a valid action"? Traditional and customary practices", Land Use, p. 80, p. 237, Action 10.c, "Collaborate with the State Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (OPSD) to create criteria to help identify and protect Native Hawaiian customary and traditional practices." see question 20. Above l he county and state agencies do have dialogue, and this should be continued and even improved. In striving to improve stewardship, it is critical that the county collaborate with other state agencies like DLNR and OPSD to ensure consistency in how HRS is interpreted and implemented. Historic trails", Transportation, p. 111, Policy 17.5, "Ensure that existing active living corridors that are publicly owned or available by easement are properly identified and that their access elements are secured and documented. a) Primary examples include but are not limited to historic trails and roads, roads-in-limbo, 'paper roads', former sugar cane roads, train infrastructure remnants (Rails to Trails), and pedestrian and bicycling paths." 21. Given the list of references includes "93., The Daily Bulletin (1892). The Highways Act, 1892.", why is there no 5Page 128 policy acknowledging that all trails, paths, and roads in existence when the Highways Act of 1892 was passed are public right-of-ways owned by the state? Because the Highways Act already does that,it is unnecessary for the GP to say it again. 22. Why is there no action stating that the county must protect these public right-of-ways throughout all decision-making processes? Actionl7.a would address including ROW from the Highways Act. "Develop and adopt a program to establish public access to historic and modern active living corridors and facilities that provide an island- wide route and connect to major destinations." Further, the Highways Act gave ROW to the state which differs from county ROW. In this action, we seek to create a network of trails that can include these historic trails. 6Page 129 DeVera, Ashley From: PATRICIA RAVARRA < Sent: Saturday, September 7, 2024 3:57 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Re: General Plan Engagement and Updates Attachments: Assignment of Street Name.pdf; Street_Address_Assignment_Letter.pdf Aloha and mahalo for this update. I'm writing to point out that the street name given on the "Land use change Map" for our parcel , 345002024, is incorrect. It shows as "Kia Manu, " but the name was officially changed in March of 2017 to "Nanaina Kai Road. " I have attached pertinent correspondence from Planning Director Michael Yee as documentation. Please contact me at your convenience if you have any questions. Patricia Ravarra On Friday, September 6, 2024 at 04:29:18 PM HST, General Plan Team <generalplan@hawaiicounty.gov> wrote: General Plan Engagement and Updates Date: 09/06/2024 1:35 PM Mahalo nui to all who have attended and participated in the recent General Plan Workshops! We are pleased to share that the recordings from these General Plan workshops are now available: In-Person Workshop Recording -August 29, 2024 [Click here for link] Webinar Workshop Recording -September 5, 2024 [Click here for link] Additionally, a Land Use Change Map is now available for viewing. This interactive map highlights all areas with proposed land use changes in color, while unchanged areas are shown in white. By zooming in and clicking on a polygon, you can view detailed information, including parcel number, changes from the 2005 LUPAG to the 2024 GPLU, state land use, and zoning district. The map can also be accessed directly from the interactive website here and click on "Change Map" in the menu bar. Swipe Tool for Comparison The "swipe" tool ( offers another way to see changes between the 2005 and 2024 maps. This feature is available on both the Change Map and GP Maps. To use it, simply click the swipe tool located on the left side of the map. A vertical bar will appear, allowing you to slide it side to side for a clear comparison. 1Page 130 The Final Recommended 2024 General Plan Land Use (GPLU) Map can be found here: [Click here for link] Thank you for your continued engagement. Should you have any questions, feel free to reach out. Change your eNotification preference. Unsubscribe from all Hawaii County, HI eNotifications. 2Page 131 Harry Kim Michael Yee Mayor Director r " n. M Daryn Arai Deputy Director West Hawai`i Office East Hawai`i Office 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 Kailua-Kona,Hawai`i 96740 County of Hawaii Hilo,Hawai`i 96720 Phone(808)323-4770 Phone(808)961-8288 Fax(808)327-3563 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Fax(808)961-8742 March 28 2017 Patricia Ravarra Dear Ms. Ravarra: SUBJECT: Assignment of Street Name—"Nanaina Kai Road" Portion of Paalaea to Lauka, Hamakua, Hawaii TMK: 4-5-002 SUB 6841 & SUB 7063) This is in response to your letter and poll surveys received on March 24, 2017, requesting approval of the following street name for a roadway located off of Pa`auhau Road: Nanaina Kai Road Sea view or seaside panorama. We have determined that the requested name is suitable and available for use in naming the respective roadway. Nanaina Kai Road has been placed on our Register of Street Names and a map illustrating the location of the roadway has been enclosed for your reference. By a copy of this letter, we are advising the affected departments and agencies of this approval in order that they may update their records. The subject roadway is privately owned, and therefore, you will be responsible for the installation of the street signs. We have enclosed a copy of the "Street Name and Stop Sign Detail" for your convenience. For additional information, please consult with the Department of Public Works, Traffic Division at 961-8341. The United States Postal Service (USPS) requires the use of centralized mail delivery equipment. Please contact the local post office in your area for additional information. www.cohplanningdept.com Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer planningrdhawaiicounty.gov Page 132 Patricia Ravarra Page 2 March 28, 2017 Should you have any questions, please contact Theodore Oshiro at (808) 961-8167 or by email Theodore.Oshiroghawaiicountv.go '. Sincerely, IL YEE r Pl' rin> • Director TVO:jd Coh33\planning\public\Admin Permits Division\Street Names\Hamakua`,SUB6841SUB7063NanainaKaiRoadTMK45002RAVARRA03-28- 17.doc Encs.: TMK Map 4-5-002 Street Sign & Stop Sign Detail xc/map: District Engineer, DOT email w/map: DPW-ENG-HILO: Jane Kaiawe Civil Defense: Darryl Oliveira Chief of Police Police-Traffic Services: Sgt. Kelley Matsumoto; Charisse Correa Police-Communications-Dispatch Center: Lt. Darren Horio Fire Department: Garret Komatsu; Glenn Honda; Karen Bugado Real Property Tax Div.-Hilo: Stan Sitko DPW Traffic Division: Aaron Takaba; Peter Noyes District Environmental Health Program Chief, DOH Eric Honda HELCO, Customer Service-Hilo HELCO: Stan Kaneo; David Kurohara; Miles Nagato Hawaiian Telcom: Roslyn Dane; David Cowan; Stephen Douglass;Naomi Martin Email for Post Office (Honokaa) AKIMEKA: David McCarter; Richard Schwenk; Tommy Takeshita Elections Division Office of Aging: William "Horace" Farr Lance Lamons, Fedex Operations Manager Mary Aken, Tax Maps & Records Supervisor Theodore Oshiro, Street Address Section Page 133 E i 'l- E ' -EL,: •-•4 4 ' - >. •77. EEP,I. 14'A ' :. ''- 4 4.- f . .,'• ••!;,-,--,,,,i, . ,.. k-Rt-.•...:„, f-i-i'•••• ' i i. t . -i • ' Iffinwomiso....7 IIMI .Ii PLA 07 ___.1...___ .,1.....57 A j i, i IIPIPP 1------,,, '',./ ; -------- 1PIt,, , 1, 1--- ..., „-,,1 1 Zfi.L...._ ''.;;;=',-...,.; ..;.„,._ E, ,1 z I___2_,, 1,rivo.= L 4,1 , n _1 4 _ 1 t'-- ^ ,•`,.'.°:,&•• -0 n •g 0 a .i .,- k‘i•ar al , s. 4 4 4 :h -Itca, a. s . 1,- --,--., I• MMO —• :tilt -...----a ;kt-,I...-r- '' i •Al...,-,,.-2,!!,.....,ir-';; "-:), ,--- 1. 1.4 i.,,,g,;,:tt p 4,—.. ---__ igs t -- ,i- z 0. 0.) ;11'0--._-•- _,--;--fl_ .0.'--,,-1__l___--;-->t t 1''' ', A 4 t. 01:11 4C1. • 1 z i n ,_----:- ,ci.---". 1.•'•- --' • 1, n , R.,--. N.,. -I r) t‘ -7 i ; ;Ii • [ I (1- !.5. I j. I• '\ 'S t n 1- - 1-i• --= ---' „0 ior ,'‘'.` ED e l 0,1,,,, ' i Z n\fit i , l' 2 V ,!Y )' I- V, "i. • ..,''' ZI t. 4 iL.1 ' •1, ,i,„ ,1. , r,..? , i, 1 7 1 icI. It:4,e7.3 4*;,°-, u, ' 44-1111 .----"-itt• ,':,' Ill \ IN 0 ')g. it : '''' i It!, ! \ V••j III/ fThI I? I A , c, I, x ' i ' . Pg,' 1' :1111 Z 't: ' I:, 0 41,,__ ____1 i ,,,u I.11, F., t 14, • 1, I rn ‘4.J, -- i. 4 . , 1 ,Al” Z'wN q . 7'',., i-t1;t5' lItt —I---- : n ill 'I: 1 1 3.' 33, •.. il 1 1 t 4, •0N tt t.) 1 a a 1-.....„,„,/ ‘. --; CI t;,i'' IV: • V s Z•t ;-'' V iii0 14S., ,t."'''e/ az 1 t ..--2 nI- V k ts s. i, C...:;.:- I ....I is® •.;:,/ 4. 1t.: ?, T,.1)....7".;-.. , s / iii Iiii 4 4,-.-1L-••,. , ri'ill '' 't ; i 4- 1,, r1::::::1„..._,:::1----_-\ 4i I \,:'''7;.ikt-F_":,:.-.:;4-i'-';'-r6 k3.•I\...., Als.,, o "•••' 0 'X r,Th) __.!-'-----..‘..k., •••••::..i-s;a:;',_):4 4.•% It M,"..- 7'S,:r:: a _____';.:,-- __,______ /:----- - r .,, . , 1;\1 CIL---31!, 3, i i 1 4.: 11. 1 1 1 t 0 rn I i/ u, ...... 1 P ti 1..------------ \' V---\'` 3, 3l.. "".....------ • ' d s-- s. •1 s--`E-277-_,7_,--,---:,--'-'-:•:.7.:.,.,..pz°-7e ,,, , , , - ., ,• I e I. t. ' . A It = I a ik i \I 1.,. .. . , I i u k I L • \ 0 Q.,. e , It 0 0 i . 1 i ig,Pi'l ,,,,-,1 -:,•-_, ,i 5 7, 0 ce. 01 7,' n...,o ..:„.9>,'',. I.LI'I NJ-... .L...L... Li...2L..-- .... \Page 134 tr osHarryKim Michael Yee Mayor 7; y Director Aver. Daryn Arai 1;. e * Deputy Director h OF M W244 est Hawai`i Office East Hawaii Office 74-5044 Me Keohokalole Hwy Pauahi Street,Suite 3 Kailua-Kona,Hawaii 96740 County of Hawaii Hilo,Hawai`i 96720 Phone(808)323-4770 Phone(808)961-8288 Fax(808)327-3563 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Fax(808)961-8742 April 3, 2017 Patricia Ravarra SUBJECT: STREET ADDRESS VERIFICATION This letter is to verify the following information that is indicated in our records. Tax Map Key Number: 3) 4-5-002:024 Assigned Address: 45-5050 Nanaina Kai Road On July 14, 2004 Ordinance No. 04-82 on street addressing and naming was adopted by the County Council. The County of Hawai`i found it necessary to adopt a uniform system of assigning addresses and naming streets to improve emergency responder services. By assigning an address, the County of Hawai`i does not tacitly grant any approval to structures, land use or other activities that require conforming to laws, codes, covenants, restrictions, agreements, standards, or permit approval. Should you have any questions, please contact Theodore Oshiro at (808) 961-8167. Sincerely, MICHAEL YEE Planning Director www.cohvlanningdept.com Hawai`i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer planning@hawaiicounty.gov Page 135 DeVera, Ashley From: Planning General Plan Sent: Monday, September 9, 2024 8:52 AM To:Chuck Flaherty; Planning General Plan; Planning Internet Mail; Planning - Long Range Admin Subject: RE: Impact of Bill 123, draft 6 oncurrent GP and draft GP2045 Aloha Chuck, Bill 123 is in response to the recently passed state Act 39 requiring the counties to adopt ordinances that allow at least 2 accessory dwelling units. This first link below provides the history of the act and second is the final adopted act. Given the dates of the Act and draft Bill and the GP process, the GP nor its methodology reports incorporate the provisions of this draft bill. Bill 123 was initiated CM Kimball and Kierkiewicz, so specific questions are best directed to their offices. https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session/measureindiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=3202&y ear=2024 https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessions/session2O24/bills/SB32O2CD 1_.htm Mahalo, General Plan Team County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 I Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone: (808)961-8288 I Email:GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov Website:www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov lala CI CDCI of foraHawaSustainable iGenerl Plan Future2045 Project Website: cohplanning.konveio.com From: Chuck Flaherty< Sent: Sunday, September 8, 2024 12: 12 PM To: Planning General Plan <generalplan@hawaiicounty.gov>; Planning Internet Mail <planning@hawaiicounty.gov>; Planning- Long Range Admin <longrangeadmin@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Impact of Bill 123, draft 6 oncurrent GP and draft GP2045 1Page 136 Aloha, Additional questions: What provision(s) of the current General Plan allow for the increased density of up to 3 ADUs per lot in the state Urban and Rural Land Use Districts? Is the additional residential density, housing units capacity, and additional demand on infrastructure addressed in the draft GP2045? Does the "Technical Methodology for General Plan Land Use" report include the consideration of the impacts of Bill 123, draft 6? Does the "Scenario Planning-Trend Scenario Land Use Allocation Report" include the consideration of the impacts of Bill 123, draft 6? Mahalo, Chuck Flaherty 2Page 137 DeVera, Ashley From: Chuck Flaherty < Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2024 7:05 AM To:Planning CDP; Planning General Plan; Planning Internet Mail Cc: Kimball, Heather; Jennifer Kagawada; Lee Loy, Sue; Kanealii-Kleinfelder, Matt; Kierkiewicz, Ashley; Galimba, Michelle M.; Villegas, Rebecca Subject: CDP AC-GP meetings Aloha, It was just pointed out to me yesterday that the General Plan Community Meetings have been scheduled at the same time as CDP Action Committee meetings, but are being listed on the County Calendar as two separate meetings being held at the same time. What is most concerning about this inexplicable obfuscation is: 1) the CDP AC meeting has other agenda items listed on its agenda, not just consideration of the draft General Plan 2045, and 2) there is no link provided in the agendas to the online draft GP2045 and/or to the link for the .pdf version. Given the draft GP2045 is an immensely complex document and the CDP AC meetings are only allowed to run for 2 hours: 1) why weren't the "community meetings" listed in the "public notice" not identified as CDP AC meetings when the public notice was sent by the Planning Department? 2) why is the GP2045 review not the sole agenda item scheduled? 3) why is there no link to the GP2045 document for the GP agenda item? It is frustrating that the Planning Department is continuing to perpetuate the bizarre experience the CDP ACs had during with the initial comment period of the 9/23 draft GP2045, that is, not placing comprehensive review of the draft GP2045 as the exclusive agenda item for the CDP AC meetings until they had achieved sufficient information to make informed recommendations. As V-P candidate Tim Walz likes say, "this is just plain weird", unless the goal is to limit public participation and feedback in favor of "backroom" special interests. Finally, why is the Planning Director referring to comments received prior to the release of the 9/23 draft GP2045 when the 9/23 draft was a complete gut-and-replacement of both the current GP and the GP2040 released in 2019? Mahalo, Chuck Flaherty Page 138 DeVera, Ashley From: noreply@konveio.email on behalf of County of Hawaii Planning Department via County of Hawaii Planning Department <noreply@konveio.email> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2024 6:28 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Form submission from: Contact Us Submitted on Thursday, September 12, 2024 - 6:27pm Submitted by anonymous user: 66.91. 34.195 Submitted values are: location_id: Name: Kelly Email: Phone Number: Question or Feedback: General Plan, Chapter 1. Introduction The purpose of the General Plan is to guide the pattern of future development in this County based on long-term goals. It should identify the visions, values, and priorities important to the people of this County. The General Plan includes overall themes, goals, principles, objectives, and policies, as well as implementation priorities and actions to carry out policies including, but not limited to, land use maps, programs, projects, regulatory measures, standards and principles, and interagency coordination. Community Response: The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area, six more than could be completed with public resources likely to be available by 2045. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32. 20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects, three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hulu emergency evacuation road, 2) extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3) extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen K. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that the Kamakoa Drive extension be prioritized as necessary to meet the immediate need for a second emergency access route to be completed within three years. This project should be prioritized because 1) most new development is planned for the north end of the Village near Kamakoa Gulch; 2) right-of-way for a two-lane arterial exists to the waste water treatment plant and the remaining portion of the extension is being donated by the landowners (35-40% of the cost); 3) the alignment is being graded and stabilized by the landowners for an emergency evacuation route (15-20% of cost), 4) the environmental and cultural studies are being drafted, and 5) no gulches need to be bridged. Public $ could make up the cost to complete the upgrade needed for an arterial road. The other six road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. General Plan: Chapter 4. Sustainable Development and Resilient Communities Land use planning is critical to disaster resilience. The reduction of development in identified high-risk hazard areas can reduce the threat to life and property. A review and amendment of land use policies is needed to reduce risk from hazards including but not limited to floodplains, high surf, tsunami, landslides, erosion, wildfires, and high-risk volcanic hazard areas. The General Plan is intended to be used as a policy guide for coordinated growth and sustainable development across the island. Community Response: Waikoloa Village is defined as a high-risk area for wildfires but has only main evacuation route. While the population is expected to more than double by the year 2045, there are no specific plans to add a second primary arterial road to aid the evacuation of the population growth on the north side of the village. Of the seven proposed expansion and new roads in the Waikoloa area on Map, priority needs to be given to the one on the northern side of Paniolo Avenue down to the Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. Saving lives must have precedence over convenience, traffic congestion, and reducing travel times when deciding the priority of highway projects. It makes no sense to continue to add housing for hundreds of families with children in a location where the fire risk is the highest in the state without 1Page 139 assuring safe access during an evacuation. Without an additional road, Waikoloa Village will become the next Lahaina. General Plan: Chapter 6. Implementation and Monitoring The County Charter stipulates that Capital Improvements shall be prioritized based on criteria aligned with the General Plan and Community Development Plans. Providing clear direction on where various community Capital Improvement priorities are needed creates a reference to be easily incorporated into the County budget process and Functional Plans for government agencies. The CIP is a 6-year schedule of improvements that sets forth the greatest infrastructure needs of the County, anticipated funding, and timing of the projects. However, in practice, the County is only able to fund about 30 percent of the projects that are appropriated into the CIP budget. Potential funding sources for highway projects include general obligation bonds, general revenues, State and federal transportation programs, special funds, land-secured financing, State revolving fund, block grants, and other reliable sources. Community Response: The 2045 General Plan relies on further implementation actions, such as zoning and budget ordinances, to move Hawai'I Island in the direction of stated goals. Priority projects need to be added to HDOT's Regional Long-range Surface Transportation Plan (LRTP) to be eligible for federal and State highway funding. Projects established in the General Plan as a priority for the protection of community health and safety should be added to the LRTP to ensure their eligibility for State and federal transportation funding. The County should adopt a policy requiring that approval of new developments should be contingent upon the obligation of developers to contribute their prorata share towards infrastructure, especially with regards to access roads and wastewater treatment to ensure the safety of the community. The results of this submission may be viewed at: https://cohplanning.konveio.com/node/12/submission/62 2Page 140 DeVera, Ashley From: noreply@konveio.email on behalf of County of Hawaii Planning Department via County of Hawaii Planning Department <noreply@konveio.email> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2024 2:50 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Form submission from: Contact Us Submitted on Thursday, September 12, 2024 - 2:49pm Submitted by anonymous user: 66.8.138.8 Submitted values are: location_id: Name: Colleen O'Sullivan Email: Phone Number: Question or Feedback: I emphatically request appropriate second road at of Waikoloa is the main priority for the safety and lifesaving need in case of fire. This needs to be done NOW, no further waiting. The results of this submission may be viewed at: https://cohplanning.konveio.com/node/12/submission/61 1Page 141 DeVera, Ashley From: noreply@konveio.email on behalf of County of Hawaii Planning Department via County of Hawaii Planning Department <noreply@konveio.email> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2024 2:25 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Form submission from: Contact Us Submitted on Thursday, September 12, 2024 - 2:25pm Submitted by anonymous user: 66.91.9.5 Submitted values are: location_id: Name: Lila Cieskowski Email: Phone Number: Question or Feedback: it's necessary that they prioritize building out Kamakoa road as soon as possible and not to do so would be negligent considering the population of Waikoloa village and our wildfire risk (number one in the state) The results of this submission may be viewed at: https://cohplanning.konveio.com/node/12/submission/60 1Page 142 CCH PLANNING CDEP SEP 16 2024.H1:54 OLSON f g, 7 TRUST REC D HAND D t WERE')d September 16th,2024 Mr.Zendo Kern Planning Director County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi St.Suite 3 Hilo,Hawaii 96720 Re:Amendment to General Plan to allow for expansion Medium Density Urban node near Pahala, Kau at TMK 9-6-012- 012-0000 Dear Zendo, I have met recently with Jeff Darrow and April Supernant regarding the Trust's desire to construct a commercial retail outlet off of Highway 11 in Kau. The parcel TMK 9- 6-012-012-0000 is about 85 acres and is State Land Use"Urban";LUPAG: low density urban;and County zone Ag-20. In order for the Trust to construct a Coffee Visitor Center,Retail Convenience Store,and Fuel Station, I was informed that the LUPAG low density urban would not support rezoning to CV-10 and we would need to amend the General Plan LUPAG to increase the area of Medium Density Urban that is just off site on the south side of Pa'auau River. Unfortunately,our plans to develop had not materialized before the General Plan got printed in its current form for review before the Windward and Leeward Planning Commissions. I respectfully would like to ask that we be allowed to present our conceptual plans to the Commission for the area,and request that the LUPAG and GP be amended to allow for the Medim Density Urban node or strip. Having that allowed we would then process a small portion of the parcel be rezoned to CV-10. Please see the current LUPAG and SLU maps of the area and our conceptual site for the commercial center. I also included a map of the urban expansion plan that C. Brewer had planned for the parcel. The commercial center we are currently planning would not interfere with that future urban use potential for the remaining lands. The highway frontage is critical to the success of the commercial center. Currently Pahala does not have adequate commercial space to service the needs of the village. Pahala needs an operating fuel station complete with electric charging stations, propane fill station and looking to the future,a Hydrogen fuel dispenser. The new coffee retail store and convenience store will supplement the Mizuno Superette and Kau Coffee Mill facility. Please let me know if these concepts for LUPAG and GP amendment are possible at the Commission level. I appreciate your input on how the Trust can move forward with this special property in Kau. Aloha, oho C.Cross Senior Land Manager Edmund C.Olson Trust No.2 Edmund C. Olson Trust No.2 We envision Hawaii, where the kind and people thrive together.Page 143 LUPAG 9-6-012-012 ea 144$) tal if It& lk fir/lllllll:i\):''-- \\`,/ • s..)•• e6_1 xl Y444....,4; 41."4:s.4.$1.1,5 9: v ict F.: -.-r..6-t--u -r 0 p uo p i/ <• 6 cStTcJ Ut4 81E„L o A0,, i.,,, EgV•41,!:t 4110,' Ilk : we4....0. _..; sve,,,mmt_ ov-to ill ea 1111k. oi, 4 ,0"tt,a 400000seea k;_____.‘ 111Vr 4111k ea 4 s 5/14/2024,8:20:25 AM LUPAG Current Status(Labels) 111111 Low Density Urban 1:18,056 LUPAG(Current Status) 111111 Medium Density Urban 01 0r2 0; 4 0.8 mi Extensive Agriculture Q Coastline 0 0.3 0.6 1.2 km Esri, NASD NGA. USGS, Esn Community Maps Important Ag.Lands Parcels(boundary lines) Contributors, Esn, TomTom, Gamin, SaleGreph, GeoTeclrnbpes, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA US 11111 Industrial Census Bureau,USDA USFWS ArcGIS web App&eltler C.......e ee.:IIcnc r ce.:unen kW", I ICr_C I Cer4 r..r,rr...:..•tine r..*iko.nee n n.....Crre.r•r.r.•ti.....e..n Geri r..r,r n.rrw:r.Coe..r_...,w r T..a,n..i....:.e r,...ncroslaCa i'cite Con I IC r.r,e„e Page 144 State Land Use URBAN 9- 6-012-012 i s 1:11 OLIW 11Ille4/‘,i Ilk k,,,/ 441 5/ 14/2024,8: 24: 08 AM SLU Classifications 1:18,056 Agricultural 0 0.2 0.4 0.8 mi I , Urban 0 0.3 0.6 1.2km Esn, NASA, NGA, USGS, Esn Community Maps Coastline Contnbutors, Esn, TomTom, Gamin, SaleGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METUNASA, USGS, EPA, US Parcels(boundary lines) Census Bureau,USDA,USFWS ArcGIS Web AppBuJder c...nn.0 Ce..I ICI-IC I Cen Mecn Mf]n I rc/_c I C.,r................I.....rM..o..nn.f n CY.....cb....u.n..,.w..o..e Cm live,*hu.m..C.CM.a.I•rb...r t.Wnni... b....ICTIO ACA 1 IClle CC. I lc r....o... Page 145 N.' J 40 ' ilk, •„, • ., 4;. I . it atrolww. ...i RI 101,L Lim. a V if . / 411/5 4101,A...it-4 . bi . . ' •' ..i•. 'NW* St 1 ii• r rip. :,,,„„s., ir i 4 4 .;,,,,„.,,, i. , a 4 411.6 ir /*alb Ifts.”i - ..allW -,-,:. ;-,, 4111 ilk a• _ . 4 b„„, 9 Defi'el oot .,.WU 4. is* . " -• . ill' ', De s 'Ty VA • - . ,i„. ,...;,...)Y.\:....-.---.,.;;A--- - m101%) IP • 'v • . tPiIvy5kk. .. 411.1' de ov iQt P f----1. ---- T--_.---------- 1";- / AZ A iL__ T 5. ./ ta i -' / k• i IPage 146 4-. 7'.' t '' F. r Tx uyy 4 s G' f it i r ice o c 1 / 1, I D C v yykyy t^ x rpaij / r..'*,.. d is f.... V i, r 1 a 4F s x r?* . had 2. w 1. r.. i a ri Jl, r F 4c).. 1\ v al DDi 4 r ' t w . or i , • Foy 3 0. 4i+ w C j r ie a( k Z 3:). , , ri : 44))• r..r,47./ i., C11/ 727> • , , . ;, '. , _,, , ,- T8t O t f C I- ET' C" F, 3 dQ TCi l Page 147 DeVera, Ashley From: Susan Horie < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 8:33 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Objection to Hawaii General Plan testimony Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define its goals. It should be thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability". Sustainability of what? How about working toward thriving communities with economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners in the tradition of cooperation and aloha that is Hawaii The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the same words: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Make a General Plan for Hawaii that protects and honors its people. Susan Horie Honokaa, Hawaii Page 148 DeVera, Ashley From: Lehua Like < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 8:21 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: General Plan Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and rewritten. The current general plan appears to further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is Sustainability"when it should be"Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over- regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: "cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend" and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo, Meg Ganser 1Page 149 DeVera, Ashley From: james wallace < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 8:21 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Please help STOP this UN agenda!!!!WE dont want to be controlled by the globalist.This coruption must end.We are the most coruptest state in all the freakin nation.Stop selling off hawaii!!!We are ranked number 1 for a reason.Maybe thats why GOD must end the world. Page 150 DeVera, Ashley From: Kimberly Ryan < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 4:30 PM To:Planning General Plan Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. THE UNITED STATES HAS A CONSTITUTION THAT IS THE GOVERNMENT THAT MANAGES THE LAND OF THE USA! THE UNITED NATIONS HAS NO POWER TO INFLUENCE THE DECISIONS IT'S CITIZENS DECIDE TO MAKE TO ABOUT LAND USE! GET THE HELL OUT OF THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AND WE THE UNTIED STATES OF AMERICA WILL TAKE CARE OF OUR OWN LAND! The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? LEAVE HAWAII ALONE! THANK YOU, KIMBERLY M. RYAN 1Page 151 DeVera, Ashley From: Umberto Taormina < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 4:48 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Umberto Taormina III Page 152 DeVera, Ashley From: Dawn Singleton < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 8:22 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of the Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland using the exact same words, such as cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend, and more! How could it be created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please take a look at the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Dr. Dawn Singleton Dawn Eshelman Singleton, PhD, DHS, CTP, DNM Board Certified' Quantum Biofeedback Specialist&Author FEEL BETTER THE NATURAL WAY" www.quantumhealthhawaii.com 1Page 153 DeVera, Ashley From: Kalei Kailikini < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 8:33 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Sept. 26, 2024 (Thursday) Hawaii County General Plan Testimony (written) Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Hawaii County Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Also there are several issues that are potentially detrimental for the public/people such as: 1. Oppose to parts of the Plan that attempts to give more powers to the Planning Director; 2. All sections with the word "Amend" is potentially detrimental as we do not know if those amendments will benefit the people, since there is no comparisons from current codes to what may be amended. 3. Interfering with the peoples' rights to travel is unacceptable as government has constantly eroded the peoples' rights defined in the US Constitution using excuses that can be historically proven as outlined in the Hawaii County General Plan; 3. Reference to native Hawaiian access rights - Page 111 OBJECTIVE 17 Increase transportation connectivity. Policies 17.1" as a part native Hawaiian & have seen the STATE OF HAWAII &the Counties in Hawaii constantly violate 1Page 154 our rights. The wording in the General Plan is one sentence that starts with the word Ensure", There is nothing substantial, as I do not see any research for the past 100 yrs. to all the violations against native Hawaiians' access rights in this Plan. One sentence reflects no effort, no studies, no statistics, no solutions, no mention about what experts" will oversee &track violations. What monies did the native Hawaiians receive for these violations?The very few areas native Hawaiians are mentioned are minuscule, weak, &just an attitude of "why should we care?" 4. References to climate change is offensive since you provide no proof,just words. There are thousands of scientists from the late 1950s to the present unequivocally state "there is no climate change" they even signed an Agreement. Changes in the weather are natural earth cycles a cleaning mechanism for the earth. Since the Plan references "climate change" I demand scientific proof for those claims & more details for "green". I know that is a business model to make money&the government passes laws for "green" enabling companies to sell "green". I do not want Hawaii County officials to be making false statements over, &over again until a lot of people start to believe those false statements. I demand clarification & proof of what you state in this Plan. I believe this plan was not the product of Hawaii County residents who care. Mahalo for your time &efforts as I believe you are good people. Please continue to be that good person as we all need to depend on each other to survive. I am an older person & I believe it is our job to protect our future generations. Fay Kalei Kailikini 2Page 155 DeVera, Ashley From: Debbie Tamura < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 11:07 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Please Revise Hawaii General Plan Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Much Mahalo, Debbie Tamura 1Page 156 DeVera, Ashley From: Scott < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 10:43 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, Nobody wants to live in a 15 minute city. That's a prison state. The first and foremost important part of your plan, should be TO REMOVE THESE 5G TOWERS FROM MY NEIGHBORHOOD. When I first moved here there were none, now there are 8 towers and 3 antennas within a 3 mile radius of my residence. I can feel it on my body in my subtle energy field that I trained to be aware of during a 10-day silent Vipassana course. I am tolerating this sensation every day, and it had ruined my retirement plans for living here I will be leaving, and possibly not ever returning, unless you dismantle these towers. I planned to live on my own little sustainable homestead while I meditate on enlightenment. You have invaded my freedom of religion and imposed the most invasive means possible. Just because you are taking money from rich donors and dont care at all about the general well being of human life on this planet, doesnt mean I am going to allow you to ruin my life. You will get what is coming to you for these evil actions, and your complicitness with these dark forces which seek to chain and control the population, amassing profit and power in the hands of the few, does not go unnoticed. GOD CONDEMNS YOUR ACTIONS, AND SO DO I. I am not going to be quit about this. I will go to the Supreme Court and even if they do nothing about it,you will forever be held accountable for these horrible choices you make. You call yourself leadership?You are despicable to me. THERE IS NOTHING SUSTAINABLE IF IT IS NOT LOCAL AND ORGANIC. We have beautiful acreage here where people can demonstrate TRUE sustainability with small scale food production that feeds the community locally, requiring nobody to move around, and the energy is already being produced off-grid. You are seeking to impose these plans on people that already have extremely low "carbon footprints". You act like you are in our best interest but you are just deceitful. We see you, and we dont believe the hype. Your whole plan and anyone down with it, internationally, are the equivalent to the MARK OF THE BEAST and shall be defeated by the righteous forces. Do not align with them, if you value your own well being, or the future well being of anyone on this planet. You have been advised. The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! 1Page 157 How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Your Signature) Anyone can send in a testimony. You do not have to live on the islands. -Mahalo) 2Page 158 DeVera, Ashley From: 8088953177@mms. Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 8:34 PM To:Planning General Plan Attachments: text 0.txt 1Page 159 please stop with your agendas. Life is rough as it is we don't need any more government telling us what to do. We need less government. We need people to think and do for themselves and not have the hand of government hold out impossible benefits I oppose the UN agenda 21. Page 160 DeVera, Ashley From: Seraph D'Alerta < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 11:54 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Planning department plans Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! Page 161 How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Seraph D'Alerta Sent from my !Phone 2Page 162 DeVera, Ashley From: Donald < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 1:19 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Donald Noguchi 1Page 163 DeVera, Ashley From: Kirstina Bolton Motamedi < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 10:01 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Testimony: Revise Hawaii General Plan (Housing and Agriculture) Aloha Planning Department, As a homeowner on ag land, I think you need to revise your plan to include more freedom for subsistence farmers and not include establishing annual reporting for additional farm dwellings. For housing in general, planning and building departments need to seriously work through the backlog of permits. We had our house in planning and permitting for nearly two years before pulling it because it became too expensive and timely. There is no clear path for a family who wants to build a home outside of the kit homes through HPM and Honsador, without paying an exorbitant amount to an architect who mainly works for luxury homes. There needs to be more incentives for local families to build a home affordably and without the design constraints from these luxury architects and limited options from HPM and Honsador. There should be a program that allows faster permitting for local families/primary residences over the development of luxury homes/resorts. 1Page 164 DeVera, Ashley From: noreply@konveio.email on behalf of County of Hawaii Planning Department via County of Hawaii Planning Department <noreply@konveio.email> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 9:20 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Form submission from: Contact Us Submitted on Wednesday, September 25, 2024 - 9:20am Submitted by anonymous user: 181.191.248.55 Submitted values are: location_id: Name: David Email: Phone Number: Question or Feedback: Hello, Yes, I may be getting much more involved. All elected government officials are bonded by their oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution. The General Plan 2045 execution is nearly completely dependent upon government officials bondholders) violation of the Constitution. In the event any of these proposed violations are enacted; a claim will be filed against the bondholder signing the violation. A bondholder is personally liable and their personal assets are to be forfeited in cases of violation. We the People will not be subjected to your tyrannical fantasies of imprisoning us in your clusters. The results of this submission may be viewed at: https://cohplanning.konveio.com/node/12/submission/63 1Page 165 DeVera, Ashley From: Sean Fendt < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 8:15 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Hawaii Big Island General Plan Testimony Aloha Planning Department. After reading the general plan proposal, final draft I am concerned. In general, the plan does not support a positive future for life on Hawaii Island. It works to actively disrupt my own efforts for an eco friendly Big Island business, recommends barriers to my future and quality of life, and such for my friends, neighbors and community. It has been pointed out and I agree that much of this plan parrots language from many mainland plans, and I agree little is new and specifically addresses the uniqueness of our life on a very isolated island. I do see token recognition of rural residents, and that many of us came here to be away from cities and urban life. But I find little of that in the proposed recommendations. The proposal lacks protection of individual liberty, and pursuit of happiness; essentials to life and culture. We should concentrate on equal opportunity and the right of citizens to choose their life style rather than forcing equity in outcome to those that do not want it- i.e. about 60% of the island population based on data in the proposal. We need to foster innovation and opportunity, promote new solutions to problems. For example there are several conflicts in the plan, and no proposed support for solutions. Granted that transportation is currently detrimental to our climate, but for those of us that have been doing our part to minimize our carbon footprint for years, the proposed plan offers punishment and cost. I.e. those of us that live off-grid will pay a severe penalty to electrify our vehicles, especially in rural areas where small electric sedans are mostly useless. The added cost to generate enough energy to charge an electric vehicle capable of transporting materials and supplies needed for a rural and/or agricultural life is not addressed in this plan left to be a bourdon on the population that is doing the most good. Also, I see two significant problems mentioned with only regulations proposed that would limit a great solution. Specifically waste water in rural areas (any area not connected to a sewer system), and dependency on propane (far more efficient for tank-less water heating and cook than generating renewable electricity sufficient for the task). However if there were recommendations for policies to support biogas generation from waste water we could in a very sustainable way address both issues together. These are only a few examples of innovation completely lacking in the proposal, and as written the policies recommended would create a barrier to such innovation. Additionally the plan puts unnecessary separation between rural living and agricultural production Small farms are among the most sustainable solutions going forward, and that is necessarily a merging of the tow activities. There are indeed distinctions, but the mixing of these uses must be allowed for. 1Page 166 In my opinion the plan needs a complete rewrite of all recommendations for the future. Best regards Sean Fendt, Mountain View HI 2Page 167 DeVera, Ashley From: Chuck Flaherty < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 7:59 AM To:Planning General Plan; Planning Internet Mail Cc:Cory Harden;janice glennie; Claudia Rohr; Tawn Keeney Subject: Question re: interactive document searches between GP2045 document and land use map. Attachments: Technical Methodology for General Plan Land Use (2020-24), 8-23-24.pdf Aloha April, I got the following language from the "Technical Methodology for General Plan Land Use (2020-2024), County of Hawaii General Plan", Prepared by: Amy DeBay, Focused Planning Solutions LLC, August 8, 2024" After incorporating recommendations to the GPLU map in the spring-summer 2023, an interactive mapping platform was designed to provide a single location for public users to review the proposed map and add comments. The mapping platform links to the Konveio General Plan document review platform directly, allowing users to derive document searches from the map and to query the map based on questions in the document. The public review process concluded on April 1, 2024. Over 200 comments were provided on the GPLU maps. From the public review process, a few considerations were identified and reviewed." I have never seen the process described above ever demonstrated in a GP comprehensive review public and/or community meeting and am unable to use the platform to accomplish what this process alleges it can do, that is, "The mapping platform links to the Konveio General Plan document review platform directly, allowing users to derive document searches from the map and to query the map based on questions in the document." Can you please demonstrate how this is done? Also, why did the report not include which "few considerations were identified and reviewed" and what was the result of those reviews? Mahalo, Chuck Page 168 DeVera, Ashley From: Cory < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 9:47 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: comments on July 2024 General Plan draft COMMENTS ON GENERAL PLAN FINAL RECOMMENDED DRAFTJULY 2024 https://www.pla n n i ng.hawa iicou nty.gov/home/showpu bl isheddocu ment/308136/638597487229830000 GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov from Cory Harden, September 25, 2024 I made detailed comments on the September 23, 2023 draft, raising concerns about waste-to-energy hydrogen NIMBY" (not in my backyard) reducing the role of the Land Use Commission concurrency weakening requirements for cultural impact assessments Planned Unit Developments I believe other commenters raised similar concerns. But I do not see any acknowledgement of these concerns in the July 2024 draft. I also raised concerns about nuclear power and some forms of carbon sequestration. It seems these have been dropped, but with no indication of what was changed since September 2023, I don't know for sure. Unfortunately, Planning Department has not followed normal procedures while developing the General Plan.With the September 2023 draft, it took requests from the public before Planning provided most of the information needed to make informed comments, such as a PDF copy of the draft, a tool to compare 2005 and 2023 maps, and the rationale for 2023 changes to the 2005 General Plan. (And that rationale, unfortunately,was inadequate, since it did not reveal what 2005 content was left out of the 2023 draft.) In light of this, County Council should also be allowed to depart from normal procedures, and allowed to make amendments. Mahalo for the opportunity to comment. 1Page 169 DeVera, Ashley From: Carolina Visser < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 3:23 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise General Plan Hawaii testimony. To the Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language. Thank you so much for your attention Carolina Visser Page 170 DeVera, Ashley From: sharkgss < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 5:31 PM To:Planning General Plan Cc: Evans, Cynthia F.W.; Kimball, Heather; Kanealii-Kleinfelder, Matt Subject: Testimony Hawaii General Plan - OPPOSE rationale Aloha, After attending 23 September workshop in Waimea regarding the 2045 Hawaii County plan, it was very clear no one that attended was in favor of the final proposed draft. The language was not practical for the needs of the community with the most common concern being lack of water to sustain the projected population growth, followed by land use, lack of affordable housing and transportation needs. My intention as a 33 year national security expert is to provide overview testimony of more imminent issues in emergency management we as a community must prepare for in addition to long term planning based on population growth. Agenda for the 21st Century by Non Governmental Organizations - Stakeholders In the first sentence of policy rationale executive summary in the 2023 Integrated Climate Action Plan (ICAP) for Hawaii states "The United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has concluded in its most recent report that human activities have unequivocally caused global warming." https://records.hawaiicounty.gov/WebLink/1/edoc/135070/County%20of%20Hawaii%20- 201ntegrated%20Climate%20Action%20Plan%20(2023).pdf This ICAP template is solely focused on human based activities which have less than 1% impact on our climate according to numerous sources. ICAP also fails to mention space weather events which have far more repercussions to all lifeforms and human civilization. The UN and other non governmental organizations such as the World Economic Forum (WEF) have been touting this narrative for decades as a mechanism to implement Agenda 21. The Hawaii County Planning Department should educate on the history of this agenda which is linked to consolidation of power by the few (Stakeholders) to form a New World Order with full intention to erode individual freedom and sovereign nations. Dr. Jacob Nordangard provides a historical overview in the video link below. These policies fail to uphold our God given rights and legislators captured by this Agenda have already begun to introduce draconian bills without understanding repercussions of their actions upon the community. https://rumble.com/v1 gxp4i--full-history-of-the-wef-un-the-climate-change-hoax-covid-19-and-the-people.html On September 22, 2024 the UN consolidated its reach into sovereign nations despite pushback and adopted the Pact for the Future, in which Heads of State and Government— representing the peoples of the world — made 56 pledges to action seeking to protect the needs and interests of present and future generations amid the climate change, crisis and conflict currently gripping the globe. "Nevertheless, at the outset of the meeting, the representative of the Russian Federation proposed an amendment (document A/79/L. 3) to the Pact, stating that"no one is happy with this text". That amendment proposed the addition of language relating to the United Nations' intervention in "matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any State" and to avoiding certain duplication of effort." https://press.un.org/en/2024/ga12627.doc.htm The rationale behind the Hawaii County plan does not address significant earth changes even though world governments have been preparing for decades As of 2015 "The Earth's core is in the midst of a significant change. During the last 400 years, the geomagnetic field, or magnetosphere, has declined in strength by a remarkable 40%. Measurements by ESA's SWARM geomagnetism monitoring satellite array have further confirmed this change with measurements indicating the magnetic field is weakening ten times faster than previously predicted. The weakening trend in the magnetic field clearly shows that the Earth's core is undergoing a substantial transformation. The Earth's geomagnetic field is responsible for both shielding the atmosphere and biosphere from the harmful effects of solar and cosmic radiation, and creating conditions on the surface that are ripe for life. The magnetosphere, then, is the invisible barrier that has played a significant role in protecting the Earth from the harmful effects of space." https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1040918.pdf Page 171 Although man-made weather modification thru geoengineering patents are also implicated for the uptick in many local and regional events to include storms, flooding, and fires (including Lahaina which was blamed on a hurricane over 500 miles away) over the last few decades; it is worth noting that our sun, planetary alignments, cycles, and space weather ultimately drive weather patterns. According to 50 year meteorologist David Dilley among others, we are entering a cooling pattern. https://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/links-to-geoengineering-patents/ While non governmental organizations such as the WEF tout climate change is coming from human carbon emissions, world governments are preparing for adverse space weather during a polarity transition building vast underground infrastructure. In October 2016 the Obama administration issued Executive Order 13744 to all departments Coordinating Efforts To Prepare the Nation for Space Weather Events. This executive order was written after the 2015 research document by Tyler J. Williams, Captain, USAF (above link) that evaluated the impacts to US infrastructure of increases in solar and cosmic radiation regarding the weakening magnetosphere of our planet. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/10/18/2016-25290/coordinating-efforts-to-prepare-the-nation-for- space-weather-events 2015. poor IIYd 2045; oeurrnrd• 1ea 1%4 AW i$ I ti7MI anae.... ftwoota B41,11 b Ward 1+w9l M Wandering magnetic north pole moving out of Canada toward Siberia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's magnetic field Just 10 days before the above executive order was signed, the Russian Government hosted a training event of 40 million civilians, 200, 000 emergency rescuers and 50,000 units of equipment from October 4 to October 7, 2016. It took 3 days to do a mock evacuation of 40 million civilians into 5000 bunkers. This was a massive civil defense exercise carried out for the first time in modern history. It is worth noting that a nuclear war scenario would not allow time to evacuate that amount of civilians into bunkers. https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/717446/russia-evacuate-40-million-people-emergency-drill-vladimir-putin- ww3 2Page 172 lid (321) Inbox I sh.arkgss@a protonrnJ Q9 GoDaddy Online Store AdrrHs-i Big Island General PI washingtonpost.corm`climate-environment/2021 9 An effort to understand Earth's pas First vertebrates on land 40°C Glok 30 surf temp 20 10 485 million years ago 390 Source: "A 485-million-year history of Earth's surface temperature", averages for geological periods. Shaded area shows values with a By Sarah Kaplan a September 19, 20: 3Page 173 Hawaii General plan mentions the potential to sequester CO2 as rationale to reduce man made impacts, even though temperature levels are drastically lower now than they have been in 485 million years (see chart above) Photosynthesis activity in plants requires CO2 and only makes up 0.04% of our atmosphere. Reduction of this necessary element would have a catastrophic chain reaction and is a risk to ALL carbon based lifeforms. Several long-term studies have provided strong support demonstrating that growing crops under elevated [CO2] can increase photosynthesis and result in an increase in yield, flavour and nutritional content (including but not limited to Vitamins C, E and pro-vitamin A). In the case of tomato, increases in yield by as much as 80% are observed when plants are cultivated at woo ppm [CO2], which is consistent with current commercial greenhouse production methods in the tomato fruit industry. These results provide a clear demonstration of the potential for elevating [CO2] for improving yield and quality in greenhouse crops. https://academic.oup.com/hr/article/10/4/uhad026/7049409?login=false This testimony is to provide overall big picture of extinction level event(s) to instigate community emergency preparedness as part of the overall plan Increased solar radiation as a result of the earths weakening magnetosphere and polarity shift will significantly impact survivability of our community. There will be significant disruptions of the supply chain, challenges with food production, energy blackouts, and limited communications. Community preparedness for such events are not documented in the draft general plan, meanwhile many eastern hemisphere nations including Russia, Thailand, and Japan have been preparing for these events with local civil defense for years. Citizens of Hawaii county are aware of the influx of billionaires over the last 20 years that have had impact on county policy and planning. Many have taken permanent residence and hedging Hawaii island has a good chance of survivability during these changes. In light of this information, my suggestion is for our county to birth its own plan based on the needs of the community expressed in numerus testimonies and include space weather scenarios as potential hazards. County officials would be wise to form a committee of experienced personnel from various departments - including the local community members with relevant capabilities that can prioritize and draft a community plan that includes emergency preparedness that is relevant to our our island. We need to focus on independence with agricultural food production, innovative energy and building technologies and resilience thru preparation to create our own future we want to see. Mahalo for your service, Donna Thompson Kamuela, HI 4Page 174 DeVera, Ashley From: Elizabeth < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 5:49 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Elizabeth Smith Sent from Proton Mail for iOS 1Page 175 DeVera, Ashley From: Jessica K < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 2:12 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: General Plan comments Hello, thank you so much for this opportunity to provide commentary on the General Plan. My name is Jessica Kuzmier Bauer, and I am currently a resident of North Kona. I'm very excited and grateful that the County has included the public in this process. It's a great commitment to the democratic process as we work towards a better future. I've looked through much of the plan, and what I'm looking forward to is the opportunity to work with the County's commitment to a sustainable future. There's a lot of challenges that are guaranteed to be part of the future, such as climate change and economic/ecological sustainability for our island. This kind of plan will be a great way to approach many of these things, whether it has to do with what kind of businesses/industries we invest in, the transportation situation, and the ability to provide clean water and other necessities for our communities and local economy. I would like to see a transition to attract a new kind of tourist to our island, as many times in North Kona it feels a bit like a party atmosphere/mini Las Vegas (what happens here, stays here), except we get to stay here with the leftovers. As we are trying to invest in a more holistic environment which reflects the culture of the kanaka Page 176 maoli peoples, I believe this would be a great path into the future. I would also like to see a lot more reclamation of grey water and stormwater, and I would also like to see the County invest in municipal ways to have county-wide trash delivery with extensive recycling and composting throughout the entire island, not just a few transfer stations. If we are really going to be investing in sustainability, it would be a good idea to make this a goal as county- wide ability to do this would make it easier for everyone. If the process is widely accessible this way and simpler, more people would be likely to engaged in recycling and composting whether in the urban regions or the rural regions, and regardless if they are a resident or a tourist. I don't have any particular expertise to comment on any infrastructure issues but am glad to see these things being highlighted as well. My only major idea/suggestion is that I would like to see Hawaii Island convert to a co-op like Kauai for our electricity services. Admittedly I have no idea what the process is to convert to this kind of utility as far as permits and other concerns, but when I was a resident on the mainland I had the experience of having an electric company that was a co-op and it felt like it was more of a democratic process and a self- sustaining one. Mahalo for your work and for hearing my views. Jessica Kuzmier Bauer, North Kona 2Page 177 DeVera, Ashley From: Joy Dillon < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 2:37 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Testimony Re General Plan Attachments: General Plan Testimony 9.26. 24.docx Attached is my testimony regarding the General Plan. RB, CRS, GRI, SRES, RSPS Co-ChairHawaii Island Realtors Government Affairs Committee 1Page 178 Sept 25, 2024 To the Planning Department: The final draft of the General Plan is a huge, bloated document full of government speak and terms that appear to be concocted or copied from General Plans in other states but have no real meaning. The Planning Dept Staff has spent years developing this document and expects the general public to be able to decode it, understand it and comment appropriately. We cannot. Even though there have been public meetings, most of the information is confusing and overwhelming in its volume. However, I will attempt to relay some comments here even though there is no way that any one person could adequately read, digest and give appropriate feedback due to the sheer size of the document. What/who are stakeholders who are mentioned throughout the document? Why is the word Homeowner not written anywhere in the Plan? Take out any references to Social and Cultural Equity. These words and the policies behind them do not belong in a General Plan. Climate change is not an emergency or an existential threat. There have always been fluctuations in climate since the beginning of time. To use this incorrect theory to craft policy, set up departments, make regulations and generally scare and confuse the public is an abuse of power and a complete waste of taxpayer money. Example: "Increasing equitable resilience to climate hazards will benefit historically marginalized and those that are vulnerable to climate change impacts." What exactly does this mean? This sounds ridiculous to me. And I request that you remove section 3.2 Climate Change Goal, Objectives, Policies and Action. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation." We should be promoting thriving, not sustaining. Even though I took the time to respond to request for testimony of the General Plan I know my comments will fall on deaf ears. The County is invested in it's new Office of Sustainability, Climate, Equity and Resilience and has bought the mindset of climate change hook, line and sinker. Now we must all live with a 20 year plan that is based on erroneous thinking. Most of what I see in the General Plan will lead to more regulations which is exactly the opposite of what should be our goal. We need less regulation and a General Plan that is able to be understood by the public. Respectfully Submitted, jail Dillon Joy Dillon Hilo Resident Page 179 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 12:09 PM To:Planning General Plan Cc: Subject: Hawaii Islands General Plan Importance: High Dear Sir or Madame, I am concerned about this ill drafted General Plan you are proposing. There is a lot of generalities and it appears to leave out the actual homeowners and land holders of the big Island and others. I do not like the cardboard cutout proposal which has not taken into acoount the humans who live there and love to visit. I do not agree with this proposal and reject your lack of responsibility and creativity for the community. Yours sincerely Julianne Rodgers 1Page 180 DeVera, Ashley From: Johnny angel Victorino < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 10:28 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Hawaii General Plan Aloha My name is Johnny Angel Waiohiahomaimalu Victorino . I am Native Hawaiian, born and raised on Moku 0 Keawe. Big island) I am father of 2 and have worked in conservation for 4+years. My Ohana have been displaced from our Kupuna aina in Waimea on Kohala Mauna due to raising rent costs, inadequate healthcare, inflation in gas and food prices. Meanwhile, foreigners as in people from the mainland come here and buy multi-million dollar homes,some of which are only used a few months out of the year. Yet Hawaiians and locals abroad struggle just to put food on the table, afford car and rent, or even education. After reading through your 2045 plan I can't help but noticed there is no actions or implementation that benefits Hawaiians directly. It saddens me to the point of exhaustion and sickness to feel as if this new plan has no plan for us kanaka. I strongly oppose many things in this General Plan. Please take the time to reach out to the families and friends who have DEEP roots in each district. Let them have a seat at your committee. Below is a URL with a revised version of your plan . Read it, consider it then do it. standtogetherhawaii.com/action Page 181 and Together Hawaii Home Action Freedom School Maui Fires Mosqutio Release Shop More Join Us! moo © © Take Action!! Hawaii Big Island General Plan Testimony Due Sept. 26th, 2024 See General Plan Click Here! Email:GeneralPlanChawaiicounty.ggv Subject line:Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Optional PDF to attach to your email! Email to model(change as you'd like): Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island,nor does it clearly define what you want to do.It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public,limit travel,cluster people into dense housing and more.It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is"Sustainability"when it should be"Innovation".We want to move toward thriving communities,environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like:cluster,stakeholder,buffer zones,change codes,amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Your Signature) Optional PDF to add to your email(same as above): https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/ files/ugd/86fc0c b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Anyone can send in a testimony.You do not have to live on the islands.-Mahalo) Page 182 Meetings to give your oral testimony: Community Meetings 1.South Kona:September 17,2024 at 5:00 p.m.-Rodney Yano Memorial Hall 82-6145 Mamalahoa Hwy,Captain Cook,HI 96704 2.Ka'u:September 19,2024 at 5:00 p.m.-Ka`u District Gym Multi-Purpose Room 96-1219 Kamani St,Pahala,HI 96777 3.South Kohala:September 23,2024 at 5:00 p.m.-KOhio Hale 64-756 Mamalahoa Hwy,Waimea,HI 96743 4.North Kohala:October 1,2024 at 4:30 p.m.-Old Judiciary Building 54-3900 Akoni Pule Hwy,Kapa'au,HI 96755 5.Puna:October 3,2024 at 5:00 p.m.-Pahoa Community Center 15-3022 Kauhale St,Pahoa,HI 96778 6.Hamakua:October 9,2024 at 5:00 p.m.-Kula'imano Community Center 28-2892 Alia St,Pepe'ekeo,HI 96783 Public Comments September 26,2024:Public comments for this phase are due,following the guidelines set out by the current 2005 General Plan,which indicates the public will have 21 days after the last workshop to share their comments with the Planning Director. 2005 GP 16.1(5)]Once this period ends,the Final Recommended Draft in its current form and all public comments will be packaged and submitted to the Windward and Leeward Planning Commissions. November 2024:Planning Commission Public Hearings.Specific dates will be added once available.Upon the submission of the Final Recommeded Draft to the Windward and Leeward Planning Commissions,each commission will have 150 days to review and provide their recommendations to the County Council.[2005 GP 16.1(8)] April 2025:County Council Public Hearings.Specific dates will be added once available. Send Affidavit To Hawaii Governor! IMPORTANT]:This is an Affidavit of truth.If you know that anything is not factual in this affidavit,take it out. Instructions: STEP ONE: 1.Print the pdlf on your right(You can copy&paste it into Word to edit as needed.) 2.Edit places in red 3.Get it notarized(normally free at your bank) 4.Make copy to keep for your records 5.Mail certified or registered mail STEP TWO: 1.Make 22 copies of the affidavit above and send it to the Governor's higher-ups and colleagues: o Print the pdf cover letter with names and addresses on your right o Add your return address,date and signature o Send the letter with the Governor's affidavit above o Send regular mail(Use 2 stamps) STEP THREE: 1.Wait 23-days(add a reminder alarm in your cell!)If you don't get a reply from anyone,or you do and they're not going to do anything,file a Formal Complaint and include a copy of the Affidavit chick here 2.Next file case with the Hawaii Federal Court click here We will sue the entire State!(We CAN do this!) NOTE:If you dlon't hive in Hawaii,please send the affidavits only.You won't file a case.] Page 183 MORE INSTRUCTIONS:Here is a video from Margy and Jack Flynn https://www.gfs1776.com/post/teaching-series- dav6 QUESTIONS:Email jackandmargy@protonmail.com For Jack and Margy's full Constitution class click herel Join Our Email List! You'll only be emailed actions and updates on our actions! Mahalo Join Now Stop Fascism On Big Island! WHAT IS HAPPENING? The Hawaii County Council Policy Committee on Planning,Land Use,and Development discussed the following measures: Bill 121,which repeals sections in the code relating to Short-term Vacation Rentals and establishes new provisions for Transient Accommodation Rentals(TARs)and Housing Platforms for TARs. Bill 122,which repeals all provisions that allow for Bed and Breakfast establishments. Bill 123,which removes each instance of the term"'ohana dwelling"from the County Code and inserts the term"accessory dwelling unit",and adds provisions for the establishment of an accessory dwelling unit. They sent these bills to the planning commissions,after hearing hours of public testimony,most in opposition.Read more The people's voice was NO!Hawaii County Council perjured their oath of office and violated the Constitution! INSTRUCTIONS STEP 1: 1.Print each pdf below 2.Edit everything in red 3.Print the"example affidavit"pdf in step 2 4.Get all 9 pdfs notarized(free at the bank) 5.Make a copy of each affidavit pdf for your records 6.Mail"example affidavit"in Step 2 to everyone in Step 3(Regular mail is fine.Use 2 stamps in case you need it.) 7.Be proud of yourself for taking a stand against fascism! If you get stuck,email me MichelleABlossominnerWellness.com Heather Kimball: Jennifer"Jenn"Kagiwada: Susan L.K.Lee Loy: Ashley Lehualani Kierkiewicz Michelle Galimba: Rebecca Villegas: Cynthia "Cindy" Evans: Dr.Holeka Goro Inaba: This one is slightly different. She voted "no"for Bill 122) STEP TWO "Example Affidavit": Instructions: 1.Print 1 copy of the pdf on your right and edit it where it needs it.(You can also edit in word if you want) 2.Get it notarized(Do it the same time you get the above notarized.) 3.Make 16 copies and send it with the each cover letter in Step 3(There's 15 letters.You'll keep one for your records.)Page 184 NOTE:The only difference between this affidavit and the ones above is 1st page.I'm saving you from needing to send all 8 affidavits above to 15 people.Now you only have to send one affidavit to the 15 people in step 3. STEP 3:Mail Higher-Ups Send copy of the example affidavit in step two to higher-ups and colleagues Print this pdf ONCE.It has all 15 names and address you'll mail the example affidavit to.(Feel free to copy and paste it into word and edit as needed.) r i m HelpTake Back Your Country! USE THIS AFFIDAVIT FOR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION: Courtesy and Jack and Margy Flynn) q AFFIDAVIT FOR THOSE RUNNING FOR OFFICE: eq RR Illlll 1 AFFIDAVIT SUMMARY: 0111111111111,11, 10010. i at Learn more click here 11.1E 7 p ra rrrrr„„,, iu Send Affidavit to Maui County Council! Maui county council ignored hundreds of people opposing using Olowalu as the site for tons of toxic waste.They said they felt pressured to approve it or lose funding.That is fraud! They've violated the Constitution,their oath of office and committed fraud against the people.They should be peaceable removed from office. Follow the same process in Action#1! STEP ONE: 1.Open the Maui County Council Affidavit Click Here 2.Copy and paste it into Word or Pages and edit it accordingly 3.Get it notarized(normally free at your bank) 4.Make copy to keep for your records 5.Mail certified or registered mail if you can afford it. 6.Make 14 copies of the affidavit and send it to the below: o Edit and print cover letters click here(names and address already included) o Send regular mail (Use 2 Stamps) STEP TWO: 1.Wait 23-days(add a reminder alarm in your cell!)If you don't get a reply from anyone,or you do and they're not going to do anything,file a Formal Complaint and include a copy of the Affidavit click here 2.Wait 23-days again for a reply.(Add a reminder alarm on your cell!) 3.If you don't get a reply or they're going to do nothing,file case with the Hawaii Federal Court click here We will sue the entire State!(We CAN do this!) NOTE:If you don't live in Hawaii,please send the affidavits only.I'll have more instructions later.] Page 185 Affidavit for Maui Mayor and Police Chief coming Soon! Contact Your City Council & Legislators and Tell Them DO NOT Vote Through Sustainable Planning & Development! Contact BOTH your legislator and City Council members: Find YOUR legislator click here Find your City Council members: Put find my city council member in a url You can also put in your town/city and State Things you can say... Sustainable planning and development does the following: Violates our freedoms and the protection of them under the Constitution! It is a transition from representative government to UNELECTED boards&commissions It is an erasure ofjurisdictional boundaries It is a loss of private property rights It is a loss of personal,physical and national sovereignty Rosa Koire,30yr California deptof transportation district branch chief.She was a litigation support&witness in land use& property valuation.She's traveled the Country warning City Council members that Sustainable planning&development will destroy our country!Video Click Here ACTION: Tell them you want them to stand-up against Sustainable Planning&Development policies and honor their oath of office to defend and support the Constitution!Sustainable planning and development will destroy our freedom and everything millions fought and died for! Source:Rosa Koire,Behind The Green Mask,UN Agenda 21,6:25:12 part 1 of 4 https//youtu.be/o8-bcAwc28s? si=_d2xFVcN5Hb4UYdl We CAN Do This For Our Country People Who Value FREEDOM! Mahalo so much.) Join Our Email List! Click Here Page 186 DeVera, Ashley From: Veeks < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 11:52 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: General plan testimony Attachments: Testimony 2.pdf 1Page 187 Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be removed and revised. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is Sustainability" when it should be Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. Page 188 Mahalo Nui, Kawika Mckeague/Kanaka Maoli Page 189 DeVera, Ashley From: Michael Konowicz < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 2:15 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Feedback on General Plan: Please Prioritize 2+ Roadways in South Kohala Aloha— The General Plan shows seven highway projects in the Waikoloa area; I ask that the County prioritize two of those routes as it evolves the plan for Planning Commission review. The following objectives are described in the Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32.20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP(Capital improvement plan). Of the seven Waikoloa area Road projects,three could meet these objectives during emergencies: 1) upgrading to two lanes the Hutu emergency evacuation road, 2)extending Kamakoa Drive to connect with Queen K near Puako Road, and 3)extending Paniolo Drive north to connect with Kawaihae Road midway between Waimea and Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. None of these three hazard mitigation projects are shown as a priority. We ask that at least two of these roadway projects be described in the General Plan as a Priority: the first, extending Paniolo Drive to the north to Kawaihae Road and/or to a future Waimea bypass,the other, extending Kamakoa Drive west to Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. As the population grows in South Kohala with numerous residential projects planned for Waikoloa and Waimea, interconnectivity between the two communities is essential, as will other community complexes for a growing population such as a new high school complex, new library, new shelter(s), and new commercial area(s)come to life along it. By not prioritizing such a roadway now,there will be unprecedented growth into an area of equally unprecedented wildfire dangers with no way for the communities to quickly exit and/or travel through to each other in normal times and times of emergency.As such, one of the two priorities should be bringing a north/south bound road to life linking Waikoloa Village to Waimea. The second roadway project is being handled by private developers, in which several private property owners are in the process of building an emergency egress roadway through their parcels to connect Paniolo Drive to Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. Whether or not that egress roadway becomes a reality and/or whether or not private developers bring that roadway up to county roadway standards for thru traffic, it should be a priority of the County to ensure this roadway is built before additional development is pursued in Waikoloa with or without private landowner cooperation. As such, one of the two priorities should be ensuring such a road be built before additional growth swells the region's population. The other road projects in the Plan should be prioritized in an action plan that identifies the most critical needs to be addressed first. Residents and stakeholders should be included in the decision-making 1Page 190 process. Listing projects into short-term and long-term categories will provide a more comprehensive and effective action-oriented framework for advancing projects as resources become available. Michael J. Konowicz Waikoloa Resident 2Page 191 DeVera, Ashley From: Rocklyn Spencer < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 11:55 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Hawaii County General Plan The people of this island do not need this plan. We do not want any part of your plan to force us into AGENDA 2030! iT IS OBVIOUS THAT THIS IS WHAT THE PLAN IS ALL ABOUT! This plan is unacceptable. I have a copy of the draft plan, and the fact that the wording is vague is enough to insist that it should be thrown out. It is full of AGENDA 2030 buzzwords. We do not want to live in "SMART CITIES". We do not want to give up our cars. We want to live as free people. We are sick of hearing the lie about human caused climate change. This lie is being used to control people through fear and endless regulations. WE DO NOT WANT TO BE YOUR SLAVES! So throw out this piece of trash document! Thanks for your attention to this matter. Rocklyn Spencer-Dicey. 1Page 192 DeVera, Ashley From: teresa lyons < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 12:10 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Testimony - REVISE HAWAII GENERAL PLAN Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Mahalo, Teresa Lyons Kailua-Kona Page 193 DeVera, Ashley From: Terri Yoshinaga < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 2:32 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Big Island general plan Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, Terri Yoshinaga iPage 194 DeVera, Ashley From: Yolande Luyendyk < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 3:55 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: UN Agenda for Hawaii https://cohplanning.konveio.com/. Yolande Luyendyk 1Page 195 County ofHawaii Planning Fv ..Department (/) Planning for a Sustainable Future Introduction Welcome to the County of Hawaii Planning Department's online platform for public enagement and document review. Share your feedback! We want to hear your thoughts,comments,questions,and suggestions! All projects include a PDF document that allows you to share comments and questions right on it-just click where you see info that you want to react to,and a pop-up window will invite you to add your comments. You can also click on the comment bubble within the PDF to view others'comments-you can like or dislike the comments,and you can leave your own comment or question in response. How to Participate 4 i Watch our Quicktaleof(otes" a Viz N dus e 6 Wand Q QCono R Guide to Using Navigate using the Konveio tools The above image shows the toolbar that is displayed on the page of the document. This will help you easily navigate the Konveio-Participate without registration document by using the table of contents, page numbers,and the search feature. Additionally,you have the option to download the document(found between CIthepagenumberandsearchengine). You can leave comments by clicking the comment'button or by clicking anywhere on the document.You can click on the existing yellow comment bubbles to see and reply to comments from others.Registration is not required, however;you can create an account for additional functionality by using the Registration Guide https://urbaninteractivestudio.zendesk.com/hc/en- us/articles/360020731712-Register-a-new- participant-account). You will be asked to add a name and email with the first comment entered.Only your name will be visible to other users. Explore the document more by clicking blue buttons that will occasionally pop up. These buttons provide more information and give you the opportunity to give more helpful feedback and comments. Projects 0 Help Page 196 GENERAL PLAN 2045., WM. VIA Final Recommended Integrated Climate Draft General Plan 2045 Action Plan for the Island of Hawaii Open for Review Greenhouse Gas Reduction and Climate Learn More(/final- Adapation Actions to Build Local Resilience recommended-draft-general- to Climate Change pla n-2045?docu ment=1) Explore(/integrated-climate- action-plan-icap-island-hawaii? document=1) 2024 Konveio Site Terms&Conditions(/legal) Privacy Policy(/privacy-policy) Login user/login) Register(/user/register) Contact Us(/contact) Powered by Konveio(https://www.konve.io/?utm_source=konveio- site&utm_mediu m=referral&utm_campaign=footer-link) C> Page 197 DeVera, Ashley From: Angela Longo < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 8:37 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Critique of Hawaii general plan Aloha I am Dr Angela Longo with PhD in Biochemistry and an OMD an energy medicine and I know for a fact that we need every molecule of CO2 in the atmosphere to produce the food needed by the world. It is unscientific to believe that mankind produces too much. I have thousands of signatures of scientists who know that this argument does not stand. The weather change is being caused by a natural phenomena called the precession of the Earth's axis. Any scientists who studies the earth learns this in high school or should if they're paying attention. We can only protect the people on the coast since this is inevitable natural change. These plans to sequester people does not make sense and is unnecessary and unhealthy for the physical and mental well-being of our people. Please rewrite your plan to give people more space to live and grow the necessary food that we need to live on. I am quoting one of my friends who research the numbers. From Donna thompson: Hawaii General plan mentions the potential to sequester CO2 as rationale to reduce man made impacts, even though temperature levels are drastically lower now than they have been in 485 million years (see chart above) Photosynthesis activity in plants requires CO2 and only makes up 0.04% of our atmosphere. Reduction of this necessary element would have a catastrophic chain reaction and is a risk to ALL carbon based lifeforms. Several long-term studies have provided strong support demonstrating that growing crops under elevated [CO2] can increase photosynthesis and result in an increase in yield, flavour and nutritional content (including but not limited to Vitamins C, E and pro-vitamin A). In the case of tomato, increases in yield by as much as 80% are observed when plants are cultivated at woo ppm [CO2], which is consistent with current commercial greenhouse production methods in the tomato fruit industry. These results provide a clear demonstration of the potential for elevating [CO2] for improving yield and quality in greenhouse crops. https://academic.oup.com/hr/article/10/4/uhad026/7049409?login=false This testimony is to provide overall big picture of extinction level event(s) to instigate community emergency preparedness as part of the overall plan Increased solar radiation as a result of the earths weakening magnetosphere and polarity shift will significantly impact survivability of our community. There will be significant disruptions of the supply chain, challenges with food production, energy blackouts, and limited communications. Community preparedness for such events are not documented in the draft general plan, meanwhile many eastern hemisphere nations including Russia, Thailand, and Japan have been preparing for these events with local civil defense for years. Citizens of Hawaii county are aware of the influx of billionaires over the last 20 years that have had impact on county policy and planning. Many have taken permanent residence and hedging Hawaii island has a good chance of survivability during these changes. In light of this information, my suggestion is for our county to birth its own plan based on the needs of the community expressed in numerus testimonies and include space weather scenarios as potential hazards. County officials would be wise to form a committee of experienced personnel from various departments - including the local community members with relevant capabilities that can prioritize and draft a community plan that includes emergency preparedness that is relevant to our our island. We need to focus on independence with agricultural food production, Page 198 innovative energy and building technologies and resilience thru preparation to create our own future we want to see. Dr Angela Longo living in Kamuela Hawaii 2Page 199 DeVera, Ashley From: Joy Brann < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 5:53 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan - Testimony Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, and should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan intends to further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more control. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main intent of the plan should support innovation, not "sustainability" which implies herding live stock into boxes while over-regulating them. Why have you have chosen to model the Hawaii general plan using the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more? It appears the proposed plan was not created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans throughout the United States/ Mainland have the same language! We the people of Hawaii envision thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support the healthy prosperity of farmers, families, and homeowners. We the people do not consent to the unlawful dictates of the corporation masquerading as local government. We do not accept the proposed general plan. Mahalo, Joy Brann, MPH Page 200 DeVera, Ashley From: Linda < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 4: 23 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan does not benefit the public. This plan you have is, modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Linda Kroll Page 201 DeVera, Ashley From: Millicent Cummings < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 8:51 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Testimony regarding the County of Hawai'i General Plan 2045 Attachments: Millicent's Testimony for the Planning Commission.pdf To: Hawai'i County Planning Department From: Millicent Cummings, Hilo Resident September 26, 2024 Whereas, Any official document, particularly a final draft like the County of Hawai'i General Plan 2045, 'Planning for a Sustainable Future' herein referred to as 'the plan', presented to its constituents for review with so many typos, undefined routes to achieve stated objectives and verifiably false assertions and vagaries will be therefore rejected. Whereas, Any plan that intends on increasing taxations, fines, restrictions, limitations on freedoms to travel or any other Constitutionally protected rights will be therefore rejected. Whereas, Any discussion of future planning and development for Moku 0 Keawe based on the nefarious and unconstitutional premises of Agenda 21, 30 or 45 or any related agendas being dictated to our County by the unelected officials of the World Economic Forum or the United Nations or any other such entity will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The means by which the lofty ideals presented in the plan are undefined and essentially identical to plans throughout the United States with suspicious terms like on-site affordable and workforce units, cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, smart cities, urban renewal, etc. rendering said means incapable of addressing our site specific needs through such a cookie cutter, one size fits all planning process and will be therefore rejected. Whereas, Any document that is intended to "Incentivize the highest and best use of productive Agricultural Lands" without being painstakingly specific as to what that means and in whose best interest the Planning Commission is referring and will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The plan is disingenuous when stating its intention to "Continuously engage residents and stakeholders in the decisionmaking process" when at no time were the "stakeholders" specified or the residents engaged in the process of forming such 'Climate Change' based plans and so will be therefore rejected. Whereas, iPage 202 The word homeowner is never mentioned while the word stakeholder is mentioned several dozen times leading your constituents to question the intentions behind the proposed overreaching transferences of Public Trust resources into undisclosed 'Government and Non-government' agencies and so will be therefore rejected. Whereas, It is unconstitutional and a colossal misuse of tax payer's money to suggest "Retrofitting or relocating bridges and roads (As it) provides an opportunity to reduce GHG emissions by reducing miles traveled" without stating who exactly will be determining how many miles your constituents may travel which is an outrage and where they may travel thus betraying your oaths to uphold, protect, preserve and defend the Constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Hawai'i and so will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The plan intends to "Reduce the threat to life and property from natural hazards and disasters" without mentioning or working towards the prevention of non-natural disasters as well like the 300 plus fires that have resulted from military training at PTA and other deadly pollution, illegal water diversions contributing to the devastating Lahaina Fires and others, the high costs to our environment/food supply/residents/visitors by relentless human and environmental experimentation without consent here in the world's capital of endangered species like the recent introduction of yet another invasive species of Wolbachia Mosquitos, PGV's reckless drilling and other verifiably dangerous and detrimental experiments, the use of bioweapons, medical or otherwise and so many other non-natural disasters not mentioned here and will be therefore rejected. Whereas, For the Plan to "Require all County Departments to collaborate with the County Office of Sustainability, Climate, Equity, and Resilience (OSCER) as the lead agency to ensure the integration of the County's goals of sustainability, climate resilience, and equity into all county operations and planning initiatives" without a clear definition regarding OSCER's powers and authority, who will oversee that authority which your constituents have not yet granted approval for and what exactly do all these buzzwords mean in practical terms rendering the validity of this requirement null and void and will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The CPTED is an unwelcome aspect of proposed SMART CITIES that would surveil, curtail, control and record its inhabitants beyond lawful right or conscience as offshoots of Agenda 21/30/45 in concert with the dictates of non elected officials in both the World Economic Forum and the United Nations and will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The Plan's intention to "Increase the use of Smart Growth principles to focus development within designated urban centers" without a sound footing as to the possibly illegal and/or detrimental implication of such growth, based on the unscientific and highly debatable premise of the Climate Change narrative and related narratives is unacceptable and will be therefore rejected. Whereas, 2Page 203 Climate Change has not been publicly discussed or debated here in Hawaii County which would necessarily require town hall presentations and debates allowing the required time to review All available scientific data to evaluate in order to make any decisions whatsoever in its regard so until your constituents have been given a proper platform for said discussions to better educate their representatives and related agencies who are lacking in this department, the plan will be therefore rejected. Whereas, I am not in point of fact a climate change denier being educated about the fact that the climate has always been changing, is changing now and will always be changing and so rebuke any such accusations or labels as Climate change denier' or 'Conspiracy theorist' aimed at dismissing or silencing my valid concerns, especially given this tactic's illustrious history often resulting in increased governmental overreach, censorship and the centralization of power out of the hands of the People who pay the Planning Commission and all governmental bodies to protect them and so will be therefore rejected. Whereas, If this plan is based on the before mentioned premise of alleged climate change due to fossil fuel consumption which is thus far hearsay, it would therefore logically necessitate the Planning Commission to first, reduce the amount of said pollution by reducing the amount it presently allows and even facilitates by the world's number one polluter, the United States Military before proposing to limit the rights of minuscule offenders, your constituents if in fact the concern for the health and safety of Hawai'i and Her residents, visitors, land, air, water, sea and food supply is genuine so until such efforts are made a priority to mitigate all other main offenders/polluters of our Aina and ourselves, the plan will be therefore rejected. Whereas, Any document that shows such blatant disregard for the clearly defined parameters and duties within our Hawai'i County Charter for All government employees who are all beholden to it by oath will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The plan does not reflect the dire needs of this community nor its aspirations or God given rights but rather, the Planning Commission's affiliation with UN, WHO, WEF and outside corporate interests whose intentions are bent on global governance in a 'Pact for the future' that is poised to over ride the sovereignty of the United States, the Hawaiian Kingdom and every country who submits to the dictates of these unelected officials operating outside their jurisdiction and standing in direct opposition to the real needs, real priorities and real rights of your constituents and will be therefore rejected. Mahalo for your consideration, Millicent Cummings 3Page 204 To: Hawai'i County Planning Department From: Millicent Cummings, Hilo Resident September 26, 2024 Whereas, Any official document, particularly a final draft like the County of Hawai'i General Plan 2045, `Planning for a Sustainable Future' herein referred to as 'the plan', presented to its constituents for review with so many typos, undefined routes to achieve stated objectives and verifiably false assertions and vagaries will be therefore rejected. Whereas, Any plan that intends on increasing taxations, fines, restrictions, limitations on freedoms to travel or any other Constitutionally protected rights will be therefore rejected. Whereas, Any discussion of future planning and development for Moku 0 Keawe based on the nefarious and unconstitutional premises of Agenda 21, 30 or 45 or any related agendas being dictated to our County by the unelected officials of the World Economic Forum or the United Nations or any other such entity will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The means by which the lofty ideals presented in the plan are undefined and essentially identical to plans throughout the United States with suspicious terms like on-site affordable and workforce units, cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, smart cities, urban renewal, etc. rendering said means incapable of addressing our site specific needs through such a cookie cutter, one size fits all planning process and will be therefore rejected. Whereas, Any document that is intended to "Incentivize the highest and best use of productive Agricultural Lands" without being painstakingly specific as to what that means and in whose best interest the Planning Commission is referring and will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The plan is disingenuous when stating its intention to "Continuously engage residents and stakeholders in the decisionmaking process" when at no time were the stakeholders" specified or the residents engaged in the process of forming such Climate Change' based plans and so will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The word homeowner is never mentioned while the word stakeholder is mentioned several dozen times leading your constituents to question the intentions behind the proposed overreaching transferences of Public Trust resources into undisclosed Government and Non-government' agencies and so will be therefore rejected. 1 Page 205 Whereas, It is unconstitutional and a colossal misuse of tax payer's money to suggest "Retrofitting or relocating bridges and roads (As it) provides an opportunity to reduce GHG emissions by reducing miles traveled" without stating who exactly will be determining how many miles your constituents may travel which is an outrage and where they may travel thus betraying your oaths to uphold, protect, preserve and defend the Constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Hawai'i and so will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The plan intends to "Reduce the threat to life and property from natural hazards and disasters" without mentioning or working towards the prevention of non-natural disasters as well like the 300 plus fires that have resulted from military training at PTA and other deadly pollution, illegal water diversions contributing to the devastating Lahaina Fires and others, the high costs to our environment/food supply/residents/visitors by relentless human and environmental experimentation without consent here in the world's capital of endangered species like the recent introduction of yet another invasive species of Wolbachia Mosquitos, PGV's reckless drilling and other verifiably dangerous and detrimental experiments, the use of bioweapons, medical or otherwise and so many other non-natural disasters not mentioned here and will be therefore rejected. Whereas, For the Plan to "Require all County Departments to collaborate with the County Office of Sustainability, Climate, Equity, and Resilience (OSCER) as the lead agency to ensure the integration of the County's goals of sustainability, climate resilience, and equity into all county operations and planning initiatives" without a clear definition regarding OSCER's powers and authority, who will oversee that authority which your constituents have not yet granted approval for and what exactly do all these buzzwords mean in practical terms rendering the validity of this requirement null and void and will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The CPTED is an unwelcome aspect of proposed SMART CITIES that would surveil, curtail, control and record its inhabitants beyond lawful right or conscience as offshoots of Agenda 21/30/45 in concert with the dictates of non elected officials in both the World Economic Forum and the United Nations and will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The Plan's intention to "Increase the use of Smart Growth principles to focus development within designated urban centers" without a sound footing as to the possibly illegal and/or detrimental implication of such growth, based on the unscientific and highly debatable premise of the Climate Change narrative and related narratives is unacceptable and will be therefore rejected. 2 Page 206 Whereas, Climate Change has not been publicly discussed or debated here in Hawaii County which would necessarily require town hall presentations and debates allowing the required time to review All available scientific data to evaluate in order to make any decisions whatsoever in its regard so until your constituents have been given a proper platform for said discussions to better educate their representatives and related agencies who are lacking in this department, the plan will be therefore rejected. Whereas, I am not in point of fact a climate change denier being educated about the fact that the climate has always been changing, is changing now and will always be changing and so rebuke any such accusations or labels as `Climate change denier' or `Conspiracy theorist' aimed at dismissing or silencing my valid concerns, especially given this tactic's illustrious history often resulting in increased governmental overreach, censorship and the centralization of power out of the hands of the People who pay the Planning Commission and all governmental bodies to protect them and so will be therefore rejected. Whereas, If this plan is based on the before mentioned premise of alleged climate change due to fossil fuel consumption which is thus far hearsay, it would therefore logically necessitate the Planning Commission to first, reduce the amount of said pollution by reducing the amount it presently allows and even facilitates by the world's number one polluter, the United States Military before proposing to limit the rights of minuscule offenders, your constituents if in fact the concern for the health and safety of Hawai'i and Her residents, visitors, land, air, water, sea and food supply is genuine so until such efforts are made a priority to mitigate all other main offenders/polluters of our Aina and ourselves, the plan will be therefore rejected. Whereas, Any document that shows such blatant disregard for the clearly defined parameters and duties within our Hawai'i County Charter for All government employees who are all beholden to it by oath will be therefore rejected. Whereas, The plan does not reflect the dire needs of this community nor its aspirations or God given rights but rather, the Planning Commission's affiliation with UN, WHO, WEF and outside corporate interests whose intentions are bent on global governance in a 'Pact for the future' that is poised to over ride the sovereignty of the United States, the Hawaiian Kingdom and every country who submits to the dictates of these unelected officials operating outside their jurisdiction and standing in direct opposition to the real needs, real priorities and real rights of your constituents and will be therefore rejected. Mahalo for your consideration, Millicent Cummings 3 Page 207 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 10:02 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Comments on General Plan Attachments: General Plan Conceptual Comments.pdf; Comments & Questions General Plan.pdf The two attachments are my comments on the General Plan. Mahalo Tawn Keeney MD Page 208 INITIAL CONCEPTUAL COMMENTS REGARDING THE GENERAL PLAN 1. The basic concept underlying the notion of General Plan is desirable. However this current Draft General Plan 2045 raises questions about practical application of that notion. It is found, in survey of the proposals here that the Draft General Plan is laden with contentious ideas which are likely to represent the thinking on one administration but may well be rejected by a subsequent administration, or, more importantly by the general public. If the General Plan is to be posited as a guideline or aspirational document that spans a period of 20+ years then contentious proposals, or proposals that have a shifting or limited source of support or are poorly understood by the public or the administration, should not be a part of the document. 2. Regardless of whether the apologists of placement of contentious proposals in the Draft General Plan attempt to justify this document as a `Living Document', they may also posit it as foundational to the development of ordinances and administrative rules that may subsequently arise. 3. Where there would be significant opposition, even if the document framers should feel themselves in a majority postion, the General Plan should be avoided as residence of that directive 4. If a General Plan directive may expect even modest opposition, then that proposal should be accompanied by a full explanation of the reasoning behind its position, as inclusion in the General Plan may become rationale for proposal as ordinance or administrative rule. 5. Does the State of Hawaii or the United States have a `General Plan' that it creates periodically. No, they have constitutions. However these `constitutions' are not given to contentious proposals which arise with the shifting of societal circumstance or environment. They are fundamental guidelines which are truly foundational and not subject to whim of administration. And it is from that document that legal applications arise. There is no intermediate `General Plan', formulated as aspiration by one administration after another, not subject to public debate and discussion 6. If a General Plan is posited by an administration as description of intention of where its aspirations lie, and especially if that Plan contains contentious or poorly understood proposals then that document should be retired at the conclusion of each administration rather than posited as a guidepost for a 20+ year period. 7. And if such a document is of such fundamental importance to construction of societal rules, then its evolution should take place by amendment of the underlying document rather than reconstruction of a new document which allows only incomplete or limited understanding of how that document has transformed from what has proceeded it. 8. If the document is reformulated as transformation rather than edited as transition from currently existing structure, then a full explanation of the rationale for each proposal should be available to the public. Even in the model of transition, an explanation of changes should be available to the public. 9. The above considerations conclude that: A) The General Plan should not contain proposals where agreement will be subject to significant contention. Rather, such proposals or directives must first be considered and endorsed in their individuality. B) A General Plan should have clarity of transition from its predecessor. C) The timeframe of application of the document should be shortened, perhaps as much as to the term of the administration which has generated the document. This shortened timeframe in itself will encourage transition rather than transformation. Page 209 PUBLIC UTILITIES - COMMENTS P. 91. Be a net power producer with hydrogen and waste management. Comment: It is crucial to understand that both of these strategies for energy production in the case of waste to energy and energy storage in the case of hydrogen are controversial. Directives which are so controversial as these do not belong in the General Plan and thus this directive should be removed. In regard to hydrogen, use of hydrogen for light vehicular transport has little support. Use of green hydrogen is not efficient as utilization of green energy to hydrolyze, store, pump and transport green hydrogen results in a 25% loss of initial energy input. Conversion of hydrogen back to electricity in a fuel cell results in loss of another 50% of the original energy supplied for a net energy production of 25% from the original source. Use of the original green energy for Battery storage loses only 25% of the original energy supplied. This efficiency deficit plus the necessity of a huge initial infrastructure rollout makes hydrogen for light duty transportation impractical. Currently in the US there are 2000 hydrogen cars, 900,000 Battery electric vehicles. Makes investment in infrastructure impractical. Heavy vehicles, before investment by transporters has to have assurance that widespread infrastructure will be present. Not ready for massive infrastructure for only heavy vehicles. Hawaii Island has one hydrogen fueling station. Hydrogen busses can operate from this point, especially from the Kona station. Hawaii County has ordered 3 or 4 or 5 hydrogen busses to operate from this station but this will be only a small utilizing of hydrogen. Hydrogen power for cargo ships is questionable because of the space requirement for hydrogen. This likewise is true aviation's use of hydrogen. Grid energy storage using hydrogen is much less efficient than battery storage and may be less efficient than pumped gravity storage methods. The County needs to specify how hydrogen storage would be utilized before placing this controversial proposal in the general plan. Likewise Waste to Energy proposals are at least as controversial. Certainly the burning of waste streams gives rise to CO2(e) levels in the smokestack considerably higher than burning coal and the toxic hazardous emissions other than CO2 have been implicated in multiple disease processes such as cancer and respiratory disease. There is general agreement among expert sources that the efficiency of Battery Electric Vehicles in terms of Life Cycle Energy supplied per mile of vehicle traveled is about twice that of Hydrogen Fuel Cell vehicles. If there is a limitless source of abundant renewable energy such as Geothermal might offer in the mid-term future then the efficiency is a moot point (as leaving the house lights on when you go to bed). However, until the grid is 100% clean or renewable, to power transportation via hydrogen is an improper wasteful use of that energy. The following are comments which I offered to a COH Request for Information regarding Hydrogen Economy considerations. Let's consider efficiency in the decision to choose Hydrogen fuel cell over battery electric buses. The following are comments by Volkswagen at their `Newsroom' publication. This article, though from 2020, gives an excellent overall picture of efficiency. (Insert link). Volkswagen, Europe's largest car manufacturer, begins with "The crucial question in the automotive industry is: Should we rely on the battery as an energy storage medium or hydrogen? Or even push both to the same extent and subsequently bringing them both to the road?" They continue, "Science is largely in agreement on this issue, as several recent studies have shown. The Federal Ministry for the Environment, for example, assumes that hydrogen and synthetic fuels, so-called e-fuels, will remain more expensive than an electric drive, as more energy is required for their production.The Agora Verkehrswende (traffic transformation) initiative also points out that hydrogen and e-fuels do not offer ecologically sound alternatives without the use of 100 percent renewable energies, and that, given the current and foreseeable electricity mix, the e-car has by far the best energy balance. The article continues, "So which energy storage system has the best efficiency and is the most cost-effective for powering Page 210 electric cars? With battery-powered e-cars, only eight percent of the energy is lost during transport before the electricity is stored in the vehicle's batteries. When the electrical energy is converted to drive the electric motor, another 18 percent is lost. Depending on the model, the battery-powered e-car thus achieves an efficiency of between 70 to 80 percent. In the case of the hydrogen-powered e-car, the losses are much greater: 45 percent of the energy is already lost during the production of hydrogen through electrolysis. Of this remaining 55 percent of the original energy, another 55 percent is lost when converting hydrogen into electricity within the vehicle. This means that the hydrogen-powered e-car only achieves an efficiency of between 25 to 35 percent, depending on the model." Volkswagen concludes, "From every angle of the environmental balance sheet, everything speaks for the battery-powered e-car. The technology is mature and ready for the mass market. The number of models is growing steadily. And with the battery-powered e-car, driving remains affordable. Current e-models are already at the price level of comparable combustion engine models. In contrast, the hydrogen car will always remain more expensive than the battery car- due to the complex technology and high fuel costs. Drivers already pay around nine to twelve euros per 100 kilometers for a hydrogen car, while battery cars cost only two to seven euros per 100 kilometers (depending on electricity prices in individual countries). And the topic of long-distance travel? That will soon no longer play a role. With the new generation of e-cars, ranges will increase to 400-to-600 kilometers, while charging will become increasingly faster. The conclusion is clear: in the case of the passenger car, everything speaks in favor of the battery and practically nothing speaks in favor of hydrogen. "No sustainable economy can afford to use twice the amount of renewable energy to drive with fuel cell passenger cars rather than battery-powered vehicles," says study leader Dietmar Voggenreiter. This is also the view of customers: In Germany there are already more than 130,000 battery cars on the road - but only 507 hydrogen cars..." A 2022 article states the following: "Fuel cells are less efficient, and lots of electricity is wasted producing hydrogen. The battery electric Nissan Leaf gets 123 miles per gallon equivalent, and the hydrogen-powered Toyota Mirai gets 79 miles per gallon equivalent; this does not include the wasted energy when producing green hydrogen. Most of the continued support for hydrogen (including for green hydrogen) stems from the fossil fuel industry. As of 2021 only 2 manufacturers offer hydrogen cars: the Toyota Mirai and the Hyundai Nexo. Honda stopped manufacturing the Clarity Fuel Cell in August 2021. The Frauenhofer ISI, one of the leading innovation research institutions in Europe and leading one in Germany has published a study a month ago in the publication Nature: Hydrogen technology is unlikely to play a major role in sustainable road transport " The subtitle is "Technical and economic developments in battery and fast-charging technologies could soon make fuel cell electric vehicles, which run on hydrogen, superfluous in road transport." and it explains that when compared to battery-electric hydrogen is inefficient and uneconomical in ground transport," The Hawaii Electric Vehicle Association states the following in testimony to the State Legislature on a 2022 Bill to supply a $200, 000 rebate for construction of Hydrogen refueling stations. Hawaii EV recognizes that hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (FCEVs) are electric cars and that they have zero-tailpipe emissions. However, due to the following reasons, we continue to focus our efforts on accelerating the adoption of battery electric vehicles: Hydrogen/FCEVs are inherently inefficient. When we consider well-to-wheel efficiency, these vehicles are only around 22% efficient. We don't have energy to waste. The hydrogen ground transportation ecosystem is costly. A fueling station can cost $2M. Level 2 and DC Fast Chargers cost around $10k to $150k, Page 211 respectively. The market is churning out ever-increasingly diverse, affordable, longer-range EVs in response to consumer demand. The same cannot be said for FCEVs. Global sales continue to be a small fraction of that of EVs. This has implications in servicing, fueling, and supplying FCEVs. There are obvious challenges associated with the creation of non-fossil fuel- based hydrogen. Most of the global hydrogen is produced from coal or gas. For it to be meaningful in Hawaii, we first need to meet our need for affordable electricity and transportation and do so with an abundance of firm renewable power. SB2570 SD1 has the potential to negatively impact the expansion of public charging infrastructure. As stipulated in the measure, ONE hydrogen fueling station rebate is as much as $200,000. A) $4,500 for the installation of an alternating current Level 2 station with two or more ports; (and] B) $35,000 for the installation of a direct current fast charging system; and C) $200,000 for the installation of a hydrogen refueling station; provided that it does not store or dispense hydrogen fuel that is produced using fossil fuels; and A$200,000 hydrogen fueling station rebate will support the installation of over 40 Level 2 charging stations or 5 DC Fast Chargers. Testimony by 350Hawaii on that same Bill stated that currently there are 18,000 registered Battery Electric Vehicles in Hawaii but only 37 Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles. Globally, 16,000 Hydrogen vehicles were sold in 2021. In that same year the total number of new cars sold was 67 million, one in 4,000 being hydrogen powered. They strongly advocate that siphoning energy and funding away from supporting a robust battery charging infrastructure to support elements of a Hydrogen transportation infrastructure would only delay our transition to a clean energy future. Again, from a 2020 article, (because not many are speaking of Hydrogen transportation in 2023) we find a similar analysis: Let's take 100 watts of electricity produced by a renewable source such as a wind turbine. To power an FCEV, that energy has to be converted into hydrogen, possibly by passing it through water (the electrolysis process). This is around 75% energy-efficient, so around one-quarter of the electricity is automatically lost. The hydrogen produced has to be compressed, chilled and transported to the hydrogen station, a process that is around 90% efficient. Once inside the vehicle, the hydrogen needs to be converted into electricity, which is 60% efficient. Finally the electricity used in the motor to move the vehicle is is around 95% efficient. Put together, only 38% of the original electricity — 38 watts out of 100 — are used. With electric vehicles, the energy runs on wires all the way from the source to the car. The same 100 watts of power from the same turbine loses about 5% of efficiency in this journey through the grid (in the case of hydrogen, I'm assuming the conversion takes place Page 212 onsite at the wind farm). You lose a further 10% of energy from charging and discharging the lithium-ion battery, plus another 5% from using the electricity to make the vehicle move. So you are down to 80 watts — as shown in the figure opposite. In other words, the hydrogen fuel cell requires double the amount of energy. To quote BMW: "The overall efficiency in the power-to-vehicle-drive energy chain is therefore only half the level of [an electric vehicle]." Likewise storage of energy via Hydrogen Fuel Cells for 'grid back up' energy is not as efficient as direct energy storage via batteries. Using P. 91. Pursue financial modifications to provide creative funding for significant expansion of water systems to reach new customers in non-service areas. Comment: Please describe the financial modifications and creative funding options being suggested here. Unless these are novel ideas there are probably reasons that such ideas have not gained traction. P. 98. Collaborate with government, private and nonprofit agencies, and other stakeholders to remove regulatory barriers and seek funding to complete and improve the islands fiberoptic loop in an environmentally and economically appropriate manner. Comment: Please describe what regulatory barriers are being suggested for removal. P. 102. Explore the feasibility of incentive methods such as property tax dedications, conservation easements, or transfer of development rights to protect the defined zone of influence of existing or proposed public and private wells. Comment: Please clarify the meaning of 'zone of influence' of wells. Please give examples of where and how this might be applied. How is the defined zone of influence of existing wells currently protected. Suggest: Ensure water distribution systems supply community perimeters with water availability to support intensive grazing for the purpose of firebreak and fuel break, or support of agriculture, or evens supporting community gardens for purpose of fire break and fuel break for retarding potential wildfire. Ensure the hardening of those systems against collapse from engulfing wildfire. P.105. The County operates municipal sewerage .... Comment: Add Honokaa to the list of county operated municipal sewerage. P. 109. Amend HCC, Section 21-26-1(a) requiring "all sewer extensions shall be approved by resolution f the County Council" to read "all sewer extensions outside of Urban Growth Areas shall be approved by resolution of the County Council" Page 213 Comment: Please explain the motivation for removing from the Council's authority the examination and ratification by Resolution the extension of sewer extensions within the Urban Growth Areas. Please submit this proposal to County Council for ratification before placing it in the Draft General Plan. Comment: Please show a mapping of any changes in Urban Growth Areas on the present Draft General Plan 2045 Land Use Maps from the previous 2005 Land Use Maps HOUSING P. 146. With an estimated population increase from 202,000 to approximately 273, 000 in 2045, a 35% increase, there will be a demand for an additional 17,000 resident housing units over the next 25 years. Comment: Please describe the County's views of the upsides and the downsides of an increase of 70,000 residents in the next 20 years. Is the only control opportunity of this number the availability of suitable housing? P. 24. About 90% of growth is through immigration. Comment: The Office of Housing has regulations which favor current residents in opportunity for purchase of `affordable housing stock' or rental of units which have been constructed or developed using `affordable housing guidelines'. With 15,000 of the needed 17,000 housing units likely to be resided in by immigrants, and with lack of affordable housing being recorded as a pervasive cause of out-migration of current residents, please include the following proposal in the Draft General Plan in the section `Housing'. Any application for Building Division permitting pertaining to a project which qualifies as "Affordable Housing" according to Office of Housing criteria will be prioritized to be considered and examined by the Building Division ahead of any pending permit applications which would not have designation or fulfill Office of Housing criteria as "affordable housing". P.146. 44% of the population will be over the age of 65 by 2045. Q: Does the Planning Department evaluate this for desirability? Again, would this not be an important reason for supporting the limitation of influx of immigrants through available mechanisms such as the proposal above. P. 149 Remove barriers to reduce cost for new construction and rehabilitation of the current housing through changes to tax, zoning and building standard requirements. Comment: 1) Please give examples of how changes in taxation will reduce the cost of new construction and rehabilitation. 2) Give examples of how changes to zoning will reduce the cost on new construction and rehabilitation. 3) Give examples of how relaxation of building standards will reduce cost of new construction and rehabilitation. Comment: It is stated above that 90% of growth till 2045 will be through immigration. Does it make sense to reduce taxation, which will benefit the general public, in order to accommodate immigration. Much of the cost of immigrant ownership of housing will be distributed among the current resident population (though some of the cost will be in purchase of offshore Page 214 materials). Where is the advantage in reducing building costs for this immigrant population of homebuyers. Removal of barriers should only be for the `affordable housing' component. P. 149. Create subsidies like LIHTC for the missing middle of affordable housing (80% -140% AMI) Comment: Please Describe the subsidies of LIHTC. Do individuals or families currently making 120% AMI qualify for housing subsidies? Please describe the thinking that an individual or family making 140% of Area Median Income should be able to qualify for Affordable Housing Subsidies. It seems clear that affordable housing projects must become the rule rather than the exception. Housing subsidies up to 140% seems like one method toward this proposal. But then this could be paid for by increased taxation on the total of new housing which would in effect redistribute funding to support affordable housing or perhaps a progressive tax of some kind. P. 149. Encourage resort communities to include onsite workforce housing options. Q. Why has workforce housing onsite not been a stipulation of Resort Communities up until now. What are the downsides of making this a requirement rather than an encouragement? What is the encouragement which is being proposed here. If it is a requirement, or even if it is just encouragement, will it lead to importation of workforce. Can residency requirement be included? Can public/private incentivization lead to the County building affordable workforce housing on or adjacent to resort property? P. 151. Amend building regulations to allow for as-built permits and new renovation permits for less than 50% of an existing structure to conform with the building code of the year the main structure was permitted, excluding electrical and other critical life safety codes. Comment: Please explain the meaning of this and the practical impact which it will have. P. 153 Revise financial mechanisms and property tax provisions to allow for creative finance solutions to incentivize new construction and rehabilitation of affordable housing. Comment: This sounds like it was lifted from a 2007 textbook for Real Estate Lobbyists. Please describe some of the financial mechanism adjustments and property tax provisions that would allow the creative finance solutions referred to. P153. Adopt a County affordable housing program, similar to HRS 201 H that encourages development, reduces cost and simplifies permitting. Comment: HRS 201 H is an undisguised blow to the intent of Regulation. The main purpose of planning and a Planning Department is to impose regulation. The County Council should have jurisdiction to weigh the advisability of waiving regulation in the appropriate circumstance regarding Affordable Housing development. Please describe in detail the regulations which have been most commonly superseded by invocation of 201 H. In what way would a County 201 H similar proposal provide opportunities that HRS 201 H itself does not. This proposal appears to be counter to the idea of safeguards to the common good for the benefit of development, and should be abandoned. Q: Recently two 20 unit housing subdivisions in Honokaa, one affordable and one not affordable, have been passed by Commission and Council and survey begun. When the developer made presentation in Honokaa he indicated that the affordable lots without structures would be priced somewhere around $300K. By what mechanism does a vacant lot without a structure qualify as `affordable'. Page 215 VISITOR INDUSTRY P. 177 By adopting regenerative practices, our island can not only mitigate the negative effects of tourism but also ensure the long-term wellbeing and resilience of its communities and ecosystems. General Comments: 1. The emphasis on Regenerative Tourism came as a result to the mounting criticism of the numbers of visitors and intrusion into the social fabric that the numbers of visitors was creating. The numbers of visitors is the basic problem - not that the visitors are disrespectful of the historic and current cultures. The catchphrase of `Regenerative Tourism' is an effort to divert attention from the real problem of numbers. It is likely that for 90+ % of visitors there has been no change of plans or behavior from before the term regenerative tourism' was fabricated. There has been no diminishing of numbers of visitors. 2. By far, the most `negative effect of tourism' is the associated Greenhouse Gas emissions from air transport of visitors. As we see more and more the social effects of rising temperatures such as climate migration, civil unrest and food shortages and the climate disasters such as fire, flood, hurricanes, sea level rise etc. the more clear it will be that leisure travel must be eliminated. Hawaii tourism, as leisure travel, is perhaps the worst offender on the planet, Hawaii being the most distant archipelago from any inhabited continental land mass. 3. In 2021 I presented a paper to the Honolulu Climate Change Commission indicating that Greenhouse Gas Emissions from air transport of Visitors to Hawaii accounted for 1- 1/2x Hawaii's total domestic GHG emissions. The Honolulu Commission requested that I present the paper to the State Climate Commission. Dr. Makena Coffman, UHERO researcher, presented a critique of the paper a year later indicating that the correct figure would be equal to all Hawaii's domestic emissions. However her analysis did not count any connecting flight emissions, but only the two Hawaii legs of an itinerary. This is resultant from her use of the Hawaii State Greenhouse Gas Inventory, of which she was an author, for visitor data. My findings were based on the Hawaii Tourism Authority's eight `Global Regions of Origin' visitor data and thus counted `connecting flights' in the itinerary (which has its own problems). 4. Also subsequent to Dr. Coffman's presentation, the IPCC designated as 'best science' on Aviation emissions a method which calculates the global warming potential of `non-0O2 emissions' as twice that of CO2 emissions themselves. Whereas myself and Dr. Coffman had calculated these `non-0O2 emissions' as equal to the warming potential of CO2 itself, using the IPCC endorsed method would bring her calculation of visitor air transport GHG emissions to 1-1/2x the state's total domestic emissions, and my calculation, including the multiple legs of any visitor itinerary, to 2x the state's total net domestic emissions. 5. My papers to the Honolulu and State Climate Commissions are included in the Communication section. CLIMATE CHANGE P. 11 "Although Hawaii Island alone will not reverse global GHG emissions, we can lead by example and set a precedent for other island states to become more sustainable. Comment: By far, the most important example that we can set would be to set a yearly adjustable tax or fee on visitation to our islands. This fee should begin modestly but progressively increase to bring the number of visitors down dramatically over a several year Page 216 period. The only practical source of such a fee is a Visitor Accommodations Tax. The current State administration has suggested a$50/visitor fee (voluntary). This is insufficient to reduce visitation here. Whereas the appropriate placement of revenues from a Visitor's fee should be toward resilience to the challenges of Climate Change and sea level rise, in that visitor air transport emissions are greater than Hawaii's domestic emissions, the current proposal before legislature places the modest voluntary revenues received toward renovations of parks and trails and beaches. P 12. Airline transportation also contributes significantly to greenhouse gas emissions, as the only transportation to and from the island is by air. Comment: The State Greenhouse Gas Inventory places the greenhouse gas emissions from domestic aviation at 3.2 million tons CO2(e). 86% of passengers are visitors. This is with total domestic emissions about 13 million tons. All ground transportation accounts for 3.8MMT and stationary combustion (electricity generation) at 8MMT. However this 3.2MMT is departures only (one way) and does not include connecting flights on the itinerary but only the leg leaving Hawaii. It does not count any international flights. It accounts for minimal NOx emissions but otherwise only CO2 emissions. An averaging of results of eight aviation greenhouse gas calculators found online places the `non-0O2' emissions warming potential at equal to the CO2 emissions and thus the total global warming GHG emissions from aviation at 2x the easily calculable CO2 emissions. Using this method Makena Coffman PhD., UHERO faculty & an author of the Hawaii State GHG Inventory, concluded that emissions from visitor aviation equaled the total of Hawaii's domestic emissions in 2019. Her method also did not include any connecting legs of an itinerary other than the Hawaii legs. Using her method but adding connecting flights brings the total global warming in CO2 equivalents to approximately 1-1/2x the State's total greenhouse gas emission. Using the IPCC endorsed factors for Non-0O2 emissions in calculating warming from aviation brings the total CO2(e) from air transport of visitors to 2x Hawaii's total domestic GHG emissions. P13. "The County will need to preserve open spaces and forested lands to maintain carbon sinks. Comment: The county needs to dramatically increase its open spaces and forested lands but preservation is a foundational part of that. Funds for tree planting and restoration of forested lands should become available via a fee on visitors here due to visitors heavy GHG footprint from air travel. P15. Pursue innovative solutions that help achieve various goals such as waste to energy and micronuclear. Comment: The traditional approach to `Waste to Energy', the burning of waste, creates more greenhouse gas per KWh of electricity produced than does burning coal. The elimination of landfills diminishes Methane release to varying degrees depending on landfill technique, which may compensate for the combustion emissions. P 15. Fire risk reduction around communities potentially limits fire spreading into upland areas, reducing fire driven forest loss. Comment: The firebreak/fuel break perimeter management around communities works both ways for the good of community and environment. Water supply to these perimeter lands must be ensured to support grazing or agriculture or community gardens and, in case of fire, the assurance of firefighting potential. Page 217 P. 17. Support the achievement of 70 percent renewable energy for the electricity sector by 2030, with 40 percent from renewables and 30 percent from efficiency, and 100 precent by 2045. Comment: The language here is misleading. If one is advocating for 70% of electricity generation from renewable energy, that is contrary to 40% of generation is from renewables and there has been a 30% gain in efficiency. Please explain the meaning of this directive. Is this merely a rationalization for failure to meet a 70% renewables goal by 2030. P. 20. Adopt a land acquisition program with potential leaseback options for the purchase of hazard-prone locations or those with beneficial attributes for climate adaptation or mitigation. Comment: This is not something that the public will bear. This feels like collusion between corporate or wealthy land owners and Administration. This is a directive which must be taken to the public in the form of a referendum before it is placed in the General Plan. This certainly would be reason for the County Council to defer ratification of the Draft General Plan. Proposals with this level of controversy should not be placed in the General Plan until they are taken to the people by referendum or, at least, the County Council. SUSTAINABLE GROWTH AND RESILIENT COMMUNITIES P24. Over the next 25 years, the population growth rate is expected to decline from an average of 2.3% per annum to about 0.9% per annum. In 2045 the resident population is forecast to be approximately 273, 000 which is a 35% increase over 2018. Comment: Please explain the reason for this decline in population growth rate.. P. 24. About 90% of growth on average is through immigration. Comment: Many people have concern that 90% of growth is from immigration. That concern rises to the level that many people feel that growth is not a good thing but in fact is damaging to the environment and our social structure. The proposal that Affordable housing permits and inspection should always be placed at the head of the queue of projects in the Building Division might help somewhat. Growth in housing development other than affordable housing or housing for heritage residents should be discouraged, and domestic agriculture should be emphasized for the purpose of resiliency. P. 24. In 2018, 67,000 Hawaii State residents moved to the mainland; they were partially replaced by 54,000 mainlanders who moved to the State for a net out migration from Hawaii of 13,000. Comment: This problem might be improved by improving the attractiveness to the Developers of building Affordable Housing with modest discouragement toward building upscale homes. This might be accomplished by moving all Affordable projects to the head of the queue for permit review and building inspection. P. 24. The population over age 65 is expected to grow to 44% by the year 2045. In 2020, the largest cohort of the population was between the ages of 60 to 69. Comment: All of the above statistics need illumination. The domination of this population age cohort seems unworkable. The influx of retirement age immigrants is a challenge to our societal structure. Page 218 P24 The number of transient accommodation rental units is beginning to trend higher than hotel units that once dominated the visitor accommodation industry. There is also a shift in the type of visitors away from the major resort areas, which may put stress on the environment of other areas. Comment: All efforts to limit the proliferation of STVRs should be supported. Visitor Accommodations Tax needs to be applied to all STVR rentals. Visitor Accommodations Tax needs to be dramatically increased. P. 26. Remove barriers to residential development in the appropriate districts to reduce development timelines, increase housing stock availability and increase affordability. Comment: Yes, this is one approach, assuming that one is trying to accelerate residential development. Perhaps one needs to start by making the case for accelerating residential development. This is not a `given'. It is a `given' that we need more housing for our heritage residents, but it seems that a preponderance of development housing actually goes to immigrants. The County, for probably excellent reasons, seems unable to solve this problem, and so, as much as we build, build, build... there are still the same number of heritage residents who seem to have to move to the mainland to find work and housing that are more practical. Consequently I don't think that the assumption should be made that we need to remove barriers to residential development. Second, how is it determined which are the appropriate `districts' for development. Changes in Urban Growth Boundaries must be clearly delineated for the public. One must respect expertise in determining where growth is appropriate, but the expression of the will of the public in and near those targeted areas is of importance to understand. It should be required that referendum or polling of residents in and near the targeted growth areas, or at least a `targeted' presentation to those residents would be made in the process of determining the desirability of growth in that area. After all, are we talking about the Planning Department's desire, or the desire of the residents of that area? Undoubtedly, the ultimate application will be a reflection of both. But a mailer to each post office box or address in the affected area, with a careful inquiry into the desires of the area residents, should be a part of the process. The General Plan Land Use Map should not be completed until such an inquiry with the public has been completed. P. 26. Review and update the Building and Zoning Codes to allow for more flexibility Comment: Please give examples of where more flexibility would be desirable. Please indicate the basic problem that is being approached by increasing flexibility, and explain how that flexibility will yield improvement in that problem. P. 26 Collaborate across State and County agencies to facilitate efficient and effective land use processes Comment: Collaboration is always desirable. Please describe what is currently the impediment to collaboration. P. 26. Advocate allowing for County initiated State Land Use Commission District Boundary Amendments to meet the preferred land use pattern. Comment: I will infer from this proposal that currently Land Use District Boundary Amendments are a function prescribed to the State. This makes sense since the natural tendency toward urban expansion meets interface with Lands subject to Department of Agriculture and DLNR oversight. I would be surprised if there is not capability of urban planners and the County to make their wishes known and advocate for those designs within Page 219 the current State Authority. However it seems entirely appropriate that, consequent to communication and collaboration between the State Commission and the County that the State Commission would take responsibility for initiating District Boundary Amendments to be considered by their Commission. It seems that this procedural proposal runs counter to reasonable administrative divisions. P 26 Program the initiation of rezoning in targeted growth areas. Comment: This of course demands identification of the targeted growth areas to begin with. And, of course, that targeted growth area needs to be identified to residents living within and nearby its boundaries. Please specify with map identification where these targeted growth areas are at. Programming the rezoning in these areas might well be a proposal which should be preceded by referendum or public study of sentiment or reaction to this proposal. Media identification of these areas with open discussion should be encouraged before programming the initiation of rezoning. P 28. Develop a process for County initiated State Land Use boundary reclassification. Comment: This, I believe is a State Commission responsibility. If it is County's impression that the State Commission is failing its responsibility then please point out where those failures have occurred. P 28 Amend the Zoning Code and Subdivision Code to allow Cluster Plan Developments to be applied to all zoning districts with appropriate building site standards. Comment: Please explain in detail the meaning of this directive. Explain what is a Cluster Plan Development. Explain why such a development cannot now be applied to all zoning districts with appropriate building site standards. Please explain what is special about Cluster Plan Developments that would argue that they should be allowed in any zoning district whereas a run-of-the-mill development might not be allowed in some zoning districts. P29 Amend the Zoning Code to allow for Planned Unit Development to become administrative permits and subject to the approval of the Planning Director Comment: There might be a reaction to this Draft General Plan that the thrust is toward acceleration of the process of development. With that perspective, and less than unanimity in endorsement by the public of this perspective, it would be most desirable that there would be County Council oversight applied to the enthusiasm of the Planning Department for all significant development, whether Planned Unit Developments or any other category of Development. If it is felt that the public would be supportive of this proposal then it should be subject to referendum rather than placed in the General Plan. P 59. Support the development of small scale visitor accommodations with heritage, agriculture, wellness or similar themes in rural areas and near points of interest. Comment: All public support for short term visitor rental accommodation should be removed other than in designated resort areas. P. 59. Provide flexibility in discretionary permit applications to maintain health and safety for rural small scale visitor accommodations not serviced by public infrastructure. Comment: All public support for short term visitor rental accommodations outside of resort areas should be removed. Page 220 P. 59. Amend the Zoning Code definition and requirements for Lodges and reconcile similarities and inconsistencies with the special permit provision for Retreats. Clearly articulate in the Code the zoning districts appropriate for Lodges. Comment: Please specify the referred to definitions and differences between Lodges and Retreats P. 59. Amend the zoning district's currently listed as Family Agricultural District and Residential and Agricultural District to be consistent with the Rural designation and to allow for home occupations that do not negatively impact the rural character. Comment: Please explain how the Zoning district currently listed as Family Agricultural District and Residential &Agricultural District are currently inconsistent with Rural designation. Please explain the impacts of such proposed amendment on the living, building and occupational patterns in those various agricultural districts. If no impact, please state as such. P59. Amend the Zoning Code and Subdivision Code to establish Clustered Rural Subdivision PUD Comment: Please define Clustered Rural Subdivision PUD. Please explain how it would be treated differently than any other subdivision in the Zoning and Subdivision Code. ROADWAYS P. 79. Allow for private, non-dedicated cul=de=sac and alley designs that are in accordance with national road standards. Comment: The County should enact ordinances or policies that discourage the building of gated community roadways, even if the gated roadways are privately constructed. Such gated roadways only increase the sense of division in society at a time when blending those divisions has taken on much importance. Removal from the Highways section of the 2005 General Plan the following: 13.2.5.4.2 Courses of Action C) Encourage the State to construct a scenic highway from the Waipio Valley look-out extending Mauka to connect to Mud Lane at the entrance of Waimea. Removal from the Recreation section of the 2005 General Plan the following: 12.5.4.2 Courses of Action D) Encourage the State to develop a scenic park on the Kohala side of Hiilawe Falls in conjunction with the development of the scenic highway. Comment: Please explain the rationale for removing the above two directives of the 2005 General Plan from inclusion in the Draft General Plan 2045. Page 221 DeVera, Ashley From: Adele Henkel < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:32 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Throw out Hawaii Island general plan final draft Dear People, I am strongly opposed to technocratic globalist agendas. And,to the elected officials and government bureaucrats alike,who are attempting to abrogate personal and state/national sovereignty and the constitutional structure of our communities...all in service to a one-world-government(take over). I do not relinquish my state and federal citizenship and sovereignty to this! Are you being used as a tool to destroy your own community? Do you believe that the globalist system will value YOUR life and human need at the end of this process? Really? The final draft of the Hawaii Island general plan does not support the future of Hawaii Island's people, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be thrown-out. Think again. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is"Sustainability"when it should be"Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same languaging? Take this to heart. Adele Henkel Kailua Kona, Hawaii 1Page 222 DeVera, Ashley From: barbara lyon < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:23 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. We do not accept the UN Agenda 2030 plan with fake words like "sustainability," when we all know how to truly sustain our world and the UN does not know how. Each area should rule itself because only it truly knows how best to sustain itself! Much Mahalo, Barbara Lyonh 1Page 223 DeVera, Ashley From: Bob Yuhnke < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 3:22 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Comments on the need for a second arterial access road for Waikoloa Village Attachments: WSAW Comments GENERAL PLAN 2045 (1).pdf Aloha Planning staff: Attached for your consideration are comments on the draft General Plan submitted on behalf of Wildfire Safety Advocates for Waikoloa. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this process. Bob Yuhnke 1Page 224 WILDFIRE SAFETY WSAW Comments-General Plan 20454q, ADVOCATES Sep 26,2024WAIKOLOA - HAWAII CONTACT: GENERAL PLAN 2045 Comments Related to Establishing a Second Access Road for Waikoloa Village General Plan Purpose The General Plan is required to be prepared by the County Charter to serve as the County's policy document for the long-range comprehensive development and preservation of the Island of Hawaii pursuant to provisions for its purposes and contents. It is based on community values, goals, and objectives. Capital Improvements Programs (CIP) Purpose This is a six-year program of planned capital improvements adopted by the Hawai'i County Council that sets forth improvements to be funded, how much each will cost for each of the next 6 fiscal years, and funding sources. The CIP includes infrastructure such as roads.The County charter states that "Capital improvements shall be prioritized based on criteria aligned with the general plan, community development plans, emergency expenditures and other pertinent functional plans." Section 10-6(a)(2). These comments are submitted on behalf of Wildfire Safety Advocates of Waikoloa on behalf of the organization and its members. These comments reflect the deep concern by residents of Waikoloa Village that a second arterial access road into and out of the Village was first recognized as a critical priority to protect the lives and well-being of residents during fire evacuation emergencies after the 2005 wildfire event, was highlighted again after the wildfire in 2018 and urgently demanded after the fire and evacuation order issued by the Mayor in 2021. Community residents experienced significant delays in exiting the Village during the 2021 fire as a result of traffic being backed up on Paniolo Drive while seeking access to Waikoloa Road, and along Waikoloa Road seeking access to Queen Ka'ahamanu highway. This experience during a wildfire evacuation emergency clearly demonstrates the need for a second arterial road in and out of the Village. 1 Page 225 WILDFIRE SAFETY WSAW Comments-General Plan 20454q, ADVOCATES Sep 26,2024WAIKOLOA - HAWAII CONTACT: In addition the Hawai'l County Deputy Fire Chief acknowledged the need for a second access road to ensure that the crew and equipment based at the Puako Fire Station will have access to the Village to protect lives and property during wildfire events while residents are seeking to evacuate the Village. A second access route would become critically important as the only access route if Waikoloa Road is blocked by fire, or if fire penetrates the Village to block fire truck access to sections of the Village north of the fire. But despite the broad acknowledgement among residents, elected officials and decision-makers that such a facility has been needed for two decades, no action has been taken by the County to assure its completion. Now new residential development in the Village has been approved, including both affordable multiple dwelling unit and single family housing totaling about 1200 units, that is expected to increase the population of the Village by about 3500 residents, or 50%, during this decade. Nearly all of this development is planned for the north end of the Village, furthest from Waikoloa Road, and most at-risk of being trapped during a wildfire emergency. This additional population, including young families with children in the affordable housing development, will be put in harms way if additional road access to the north end of the Village is not made available concurrent with other development in the area. This development increases the urgent need for action to ensure that an additional arterial road is open to traffic this decade. Policies. Commenters support the three policies aimed at addressing this situation in the draft General Plan: 32.h. Establish, map and maintain alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area. 32.k. Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress. 32. 20 Prioritize hazard mitigation projects in the CIP (Capital improvement plan). The draft plan includes seven road projects for the Waikoloa area between Waikoloa Road and Kawaihae Road. Only three of the seven projects mapped for the Waikoloa area satisfy the first two policies: the Hulu widening and upgrade, the Kamakoa Drive extension to Queen Ka'ahumanu, and the extension of Paniolo Drive to Kawaihae Road. But the Plan does not implement the policy to "prioritize hazard mitigation projects" for the CIP. It should. 2 Page 226 WILDFIRE SAFETY WSAW Comments-General Plan 2045ADVOCATES WAIKOLOA HA.A. Sep 26,2024 CONTACT: At the planning staff workshop last month in Kona, Zendo Kern highlighted your initiative to use the GP to set priorities which has not been done in the past.The County charter anticipates that the GP will be used for that purpose in section 10-6(a)(2) which requires that projects in the Capital Improvements budget be "aligned" with priorities in the Plan. Despite the Policy 32.20 which calls for hazard mitigation projects to be prioritized, the current GP draft only proposes priorities for waste water treatment and solid waste disposal. It should also address priorities for highway projects that implement the policies in 32h ("alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area"), and 32k ("Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress"). The draft plan maps three new highways for the Waikoloa area that would implement these policy objectives, but does not prioritize them. Commenters ask that these road projects for hazard mitigation be prioritized. Projects need to be prioritized for three reasons. First, section 10-6(a)(2) of the County Charter links the selection of projects for the Capital Improvements budget to priorities established in the General Plan.The Charter makes clear that the General Plan is the appropriate planning tool for identifying priority projects that address community needs. Second the General Plan is the primary planning vehicle designed to guide growth, reflect community needs, and ensure that the impacts of growth can be accommodated in ways that protect community health and safety. With the north end of Waikoloa Village recognized as a center for significant growth, including residential development, a new library, and an expansion of the K-8 school to accommodate a growing student population, roads need to be prioritized to ensure that transportation infrastructure is adequate to serve planned new development. Third, the General Plan will serve as a guide for the development by HDOT of the Long-range surface transportation plan for the Island. Federal law requires that road projects be included in the LRTP to be eligible for federal transportation funds. The state also uses this planning process to determine if projects qualify for State funding. The second arterial road for Waikoloa Village should be prioritized in the General Plan to provide direction and guidance for the HDOT transportation plan. Criteria for Prioritizing Access Road Projects. At best, only one of the three projects in the Waikoloa area that satisfy the policies in 32h and 32k have the potential to be completed in this decade. We ask that you identify the extension of Kamakoa Drive to Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway as the first priority for three reasons: 1) Kamakoa Drive directly serves the parcels in the north end of the Village where almost all the new development is planned (including the library), 2) the costs born by the public will be lowest of the three projects because of commitments by the landowners, and 3 Page 227 WILDFIRE SAFETY WSAW Comments-General Plan 2045ADVOCATES WAINOLOA HAP, Sep 26,2024 CONTACT: 3) it will soon be half built because landowners with a vested interest in the on-going developments have submitted permit applications to excavate the right-of-way for a temporary emergency evacuation road that can be upgraded to meet the standards for a dedicated county arterial road. Clearly no second arterial road will be completed and open to traffic before the residential new development is built without public funds. The costs of these projects are significant within the context of both the County CIP budget and the State CIP. The odds of getting two funded during the next 5 years are virtually zero, and the odds of getting the Paniolo extension funded are close to zero without a major infusion of federal $. The Kamakoa Drive extension is the only option that has a reasonable chance of being affordable with available public resources this decade. The economic feasibility of projects should be a critical factor in prioritizing projects.The public cost of extending Kamakoa Dr to Q-K is far less than extending Paniolo to Kawaihae Road. The difference between the two could be as much as $100 million. The land for the Kamakoa extension is being donated by the land owners, they are constructing the initial alignment for the r-o-w, performing the environmental and cultural resource reviews, and there are no stream crossings that require bridges. The Paniolo extension to Kawaihae Road route is more than three times longer, has no commitment from landowners to donate the land, no work is being performed by private sources to lay out, excavate and build a r-o-w, and the route crosses four major gulches requiring expensive bridges. The huge additional cost of the Paniolo route ensures that NO resources will be available to complete it within this decade. Completing the Kamakoa route is at least financially feasible before the Village adds 50% more residents and the next fire emergency triggers an evacuation and the need for access by first responders from the Puako Fire Station. CONCLUSION. For these reasons discussed above, we ask that the General Plan implement policy 32.20 to prioritize hazard mitigation projects by assessing and ranking the three road projects that implement the policies in 32h ("Establish ... alternative and emergency evacuation routes in each high risk hazard area"), and 32k ("Develop and/or improve secondary access roads for those communities with only one means of ingress/egress"), and that you rank the extension of Kamakoa Drive to Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway as the highest priority road project for the Waikoloa area. We also ask that the General Plan make clear that additional an access road connecting the north end of Waikoloa Villege to the regional transportation network is a critical infrastructure need that must be satisfied before any further development is approved to further increase the population in that portion of the Village. Prepared by Bob Yuhnke, on behalf of Wildfire Safety Advocates of Waikoloa. Approved by— 4 Page 228 WILDFIRE SAFETY WSAW Comments-General Plan 2045ADVOCATESSep26,2024 WAINOLOA HAWAII CONTACT: Matt Chalker Aislinn Chalker Rebecca Greto Kendra T. Bruno Halepua Street Serena Hernandez Waikoloa Village Homeowner 5 Page 229 DeVera, Ashley From: Email Service < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 10: 16 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Stand together Attachments: pfavico.ico Aloha kakou Hawaii general plan needs a different concept that is being presented. This is what we need. Me ka haahaa Clare loprinzi indigenous practitioner Action EZ Sent from my iPhone 1Page 230 DeVera, Ashley From: Claudia Rohr < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:01 PM To:Planning General Plan Cc: Planning Internet Mail; Surprenant, April Subject: General Plan 2024 proposed content Aloha- There is no good way to edit comments online, so I am repeating/editing some of my proposed amendments to the proposed GP 2045 here that have been ignored. Please confirm receipt. Proposed Amendment, replacing the proposed content with:] CLIMATE CHANGE GOAL The people of Hawaii have declared "a climate emergency."S.C.R. 44, S.D. 1, H.D. 1, 31st Leg., Reg. Sess. (2021). To ensure our residents' right to a life-sustaining climate,the County of Hawaii adopts a primary goal to reduce carbon and greenhouse gas emissions now, before the damage done to the environment is irreversible,through adopting a zero carbon and greenhouse gas emissions, clean economy target and through incorporating equitable climate mitigation and adaptation strategies and priorities into all policies, programs, infrastructure, and decision making. OBJECTIVE 1 Ensure the County addresses our climate emergency and achieves the state carbon goal deadlines set out in Chapter 225P, Hawaii Revised Statutes and S.C.R. 44, S.D. 1, H.D. 1, 31st Leg., Reg. Sess. (2021). OBJECTIVE 2 Ensure that our county prioritizes and schedules the fortification of low areas in our roadways being inundated by high tide and storm events as an equitable climate mitigation and adaptive strategy to protect our coastal transportation infrastructure and corresponding water and sewer infrastructure therein. Proposed Amendment replacing/adding content:] POLICIES 1. 1 Sequester more atmospheric carbon and greenhouse gases than emitted within the County as quickly as practicable, but no later than 2045; provided that the County target includes a greenhouse gas emissions limit,to be achieved no later than 2030, of at least fifty per cent below the level of the County's greenhouse gas emissions in 2005. 1.2 Promote, encourage, and reward healthful modes of transportation such as walking and riding bicycles. 1.3 Promote, encourage, and reward the use of public transportation for everyone. 1.4 Discourage and decrease the use of private vehicles on our roadways. 1.5 Promote, encourage, and reward a healthful, locally produced whole foods diet for everyone. 1.6 Promote, encourage, and reward energy self-sufficiency for everyone. 1.7 Promote, encourage and reward affordable and subsidized housing projects that are energy efficient and that use environmentally friendly and sustainable materials. Proposed Amendment, replace/add:] PRIORITY ACTIONS 1Page 231 1.a Reduce emissions that cause climate change and build energy efficiencies across all sectors, including decarbonizing the transportation sector. 1.b Manage the County's fleets and buses to achieve the clean ground transportation goals defined in section 196-9(c)(10) and decarbonization goals established pursuant to HRS chapter 225P. 1.c Expand the schedule of Bike Lanes and Bike Routes on every qualified road and develop a standard for pedestrian pathways on curbless streets. 1.d Where road right-of-way widths are insufficient to provide bicycle lanes, bicycle routes, and pedestrian paths under the Code, paint bicycle and pedestrian symbols on the paved road shoulder to prioritize these forms of healthful transportation, to provide notice to drivers of motor vehicles of the presence of bicyclists and pedestrians, and to provide equal access along narrow roads to bicyclists and pedestrians with a low tech/low cost solution. 1.e. Fortify coastal roadways and infrastructure therein as well as a developing a plan to move mechanical and electrical systems out of low lying basements in county buildings now before inundated by sea level rise. Claudia Rohr 2Page 232 DeVera, Ashley From: Claudia Rohr < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 1:51 PM To:Planning General Plan Cc: Planning Internet Mail; Surprenant, April Subject: Comments General Plan 2045 review Aloha- my comments are as follows. 1) The proposed general plan 2045 eliminates the "Standards" of the 2005 GP and is contrary to state law HRS §226-58, the Charter Section 3-15, and Hawaii County Code, Section 2-31, as follows see where emphasis is added in bold italics, and underline): 226-58 County general plans. (a) The county general plans and development plans shall be formulated with input from the state and county agencies as well as the general public. County general plans or development plans shall indicate desired population and physical development patterns for each county and regions within each county. In addition, county general plans or development plans shall address the unique problems and needs of each county and regions within each county. The county general plans or development plans shall further define applicable provisions of this chapter; provided that any amendment to the county general plan of each county shall not be contrary to the county charter. The formulation, amendment, and implementation of county general plans or development plans shall take into consideration statewide objectives, policies, and programs stipulated in state functional plans approved in consonance with this chapter. b) County general plans shall be formulated on the basis of sound rationale, data, analyses, and input from state and county agencies and the general public, and contain objectives and policies as required by the charter of each county. Further, the county general plans should: 1) Contain objectives to be achieved and policies to be pursued with respect to population density, land use, transportation system location, public and community facility locations, water and sewage system locations, visitor destinations, urban design, and all other matters necessary for the coordinated development of the county and regions within the county; and 2) Contain implementation priorities and actions to carry out policies to include but not be limited to land use maps, programs, projects, regulatory measures, standards and principles, and interagency coordination provisions. Charter, Section 3-15. General Plan. The county council shall adopt by ordinance a general plan which shall set forth the council's long range policy for the comprehensive physical, economic, environmental, and socio cultural wellbeing of the county. (a) The general plan shall contain a statement of development objectives, standards and principles with respect to the most desirable use of land within the county for residential, recreational, agricultural, commercial, industrial and other purposes which shall be consistent with proper conservation of natural resources and the preservation of our natural beauty and historical sites; the most desirable density of population in the several parts of the county; a system of principal thoroughfares, highways, streets, public access to the shorelines, and other open spaces; the general locations, relocations and improvement of public buildings, the general location and extent of public utilities and terminals, whether publicly or privately owned, for water, sewers, light, power, transit, and other purposes; the extent and location of public housing projects; adequate drainage facilities and control; air pollution; and such other matter Page 233 as may, in the council's judgment, promote the general welfare, health, and prosperity of its people. b) The council shall enact zoning, subdivision, and such other ordinances which shall contain the necessary provisions to carry out the purpose of the general plan. (c) No public improvement or project, or subdivision or zoning ordinance, shall be initiated or adopted unless the same conforms to and implements the general plan. (d) Amendments to the general plan may be initiated by the council or the planning director. Hawaii County Code, Chapter 2, Section 2-31. General plan; contents; location. (a) The general plan shall include a map of the County and shall contain a statement of: (1) Development objectives, standards and principles with respect to the most desirable use of land within the County for residential, recreational, agricultural, commercial, industrial, and other purposes; Moreover, the lack of standards in the GP 2045 is contrary to a state plan-- the CZMA. HRS section 205A-26(2)(C) mandates that no development shall be approved unless consistent with the General Plan. Thank you for your time. Claudia Rohr 2Page 234 DeVera, Ashley From: Kui & I Florist < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 9:46 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: please stand up for our aina and our people Aloha, I am grateful for those who are taking the time to look out for all of us, reading all the entire document, explaining it, putting their name, energy and time to educate us. I truly love this land, this community and the people of this beautiful island and state. Yet I don't take the time to do what they have done. To send an email in support of what they are so passionately trying to convey is the least I can do. Sometimes I get discouraged thinking that those who read the emails, if they even get read, don't really care what we have to say. My hope is that those who do have the power to make policy on our behalf, really take the time and energy to listen to what concerns the people and address them. I realize it's no easy position to be in. All we really hope for is for the truth. There is always two sides and the truth. It is the truth never changes or goes away. Never. With your best effort, please kokua and support those who don't want to control, but instead share, help and protect our island. We must also protect and carry on the aloha spirit that makes this place so, so special. Mahalo for considering the revised general plan. Caroline Wong iPage 235 DeVera, Ashley From: donna grabow < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:19 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Why the General Plan is anti-people To: Hawaii Island Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan needs to be thrown-out. The General Plan is vague, and it is obvious that the objective is to put people into dense housing and to restrict travel. The buzz word "Sustainability" is repeatedly used in the Plan - because it sounds good. But it does not support small farmers and food growing. Hawaii was prosperous during the 1800s and produced much food, and the abundance was exported. Now, the cane fields have grown fallow and the jungle reclaimed farmlands. This new General Plan did not originate in Hawaii, but is replicated throughout the United States with the same shady words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend. Yours truly, Donna Grabow Hilo Page 236 DeVera, Ashley From: Elizabeth Dunn < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 1:31 PM To:Planning General Plan; Surprenant, April; Villegas, Rebecca Subject: Comments on the Draft General Plan Attachments: Draft GP 2045 Comments 092624.pdf; Attachment 1 (Pages 40-48).pdf; Attachment 2 Pages 67-71).pdf; Attachment 3 (pages 78-82).pdf; Attachment 4 (pages 199-208).pdf Aloha County Planning Staff: I'm attaching my comments on the draft General Plan. As there is a running list of comments, and attachments, I may have to send these in batches to you. Thank you for the hard, and good work on this document. I know it's a process. Elizabeth Dunn 1Page 237 September 26, 2024 Comments on the County of Hawai'i General Plan 2045 Final Recommended Draft July 2024 GLOSSARY: Functional Plan: Why would a functional plan not be adopted by Resolution? This is a bad idea to create a plan, have public comments on the plan, and then have it adopted by Resolution. Why would the public trust such a plan. Please also explain if these functional plans are required to be prepared by other County or State Agencies or if this is an intention or "best practices" from the Planning Department and its General Plan consultants. I attended the General Plan meeting in Kona in late August. The way the information was presented at this meeting was that these functional plans were something to explore, and not a required procedure. Also, how does this type of plan differ from a policy? There needs to be a further and greater explanation of this type of plan, how it' s used, what Agency uses this plan, and why it's necessary. The definition, and application, feels phony, and troubling in how it's used, created, and adopted (or not). Incompatible Development: Please explain this better or provide an example of this. The descriptor makes it sound like a land use that's crossed a property line (with a few different options to solve this situation). However, the "negative or economic or environmental effects" implies something different, like the impacts of climate change, or VOG. Please provide a better explanation of what this is, and why this term is needed in the General Plan. Indigenous Data Science: Please better explain what is being said here. It's not easy to follow, and it should be. Please also expand somewhere in the draft General Plan HOW community engagement is to occur for this type of IDS. I am very skeptical about the Planning Department's approach to engaging the indigenous communities since it appears not to unless required by by SHPD for the various cultural impact assessments, burial plans, or archeological studies. A better approach would be to reach out to the indigenous communities island wide, and start to build a relationship with people so that when development applications are submitted, the various communities are consulted first, and not as an afterthought. Innovative Housing: The use of ADUs, factory-built homes, manufactures or modular (and volumetric) housing are not new types or uses of housing. If it is to Hawai'i Island, please say that. Please also define what is "volumetric housing"? Please use more basic terms in the General Plan that some of what reads as weird jargon. Integrated Resource Plans: Cross-island transmission lines? Is this discussed elsewhere in the draft GP? This is a huge issue, even if the Planning Department, and the County of Hawai'i can only give guidance to HELCO or the state Public Utility Commission on this issue. These transmission lines are an eyesore, there's been a huge body of information about the health risk potential of the electromagnetic fields (EMFs) emitted by these power lines, and where this kind of facility is places. Net Zero: The term "global warming" is used here. I thought the term "climate change" is the more commonly used phrase. Please consider using this language throughout the draft General Plan. Page 10 of the Glossary has a definition of Climate Change, Climate Change Page 238 Impacts, Climate Mitigation, and Climate Resilience. Global warming is a term that isn't used in these descriptions. Please work to be as internally consistent with terms as best as you can. Open Space: Please consider revising this definition. I find it very troubling that this proposed term has land uses that would not normally be included in this "catch all" category, such as flood protection, separation of incompatible land uses, areas for agricultural operations, historical site preservation, and lands with slopes of 20% or more. There are better land use categories for these descriptions. I sympathize with wanting to streamline the number and amount of General Plan (and future Zoning Code) land use designations, but there are too many land uses thrown into the OPEN SPACE category. Overlay and Overlay Zone: These definitions say the same thing. Please consider using only the Overlay Zone. People are smart enough to understand what an Overlay is and that an Overlay Zone is an additional layer of requirements. Underserved Subdivisions: What is the purpose of this definition? It feels out of place, and not needed. Urban Growth Area (UGA): Second bullet point - what does "respect" mean? Please qualify and clarify. Third bullet point - sufficiently. What does this mean? How is this quantified? Is there any thought to combine this definition with Urban Service Area? The definitions seem quite similar and appear to work towards the same intent. Variance: Please expand this definition, as this isn't as specific as it should be. Please look at Local Planning - Contemporary Principles and Practices" for a better definition. Please explain why there are so many levels of plans: Community Development Plan, Functional Plans; General Plan; Integrated Resource Plans; Master Plan; Special Area Plans; Urban Development Plans; and Village Plan. Do all of these types of Plans currently exist, or are required? Are some of them good ideas to create in the future by the County of Hawai'i or Agencies it works with? A graphic to show how these plans work together and why all of these types of Plans are needed will help to explain why so many types of plans are discussed and how they are intended to work together. I know there is Figure 3 in Chapter 1, but this doesn't elaborate on my issue of whys many plans exist, and are needed. It's unnecessarily complicated. A City of approximately 200,000 on the mainland wouldn't have so many regulatory hurdles with various plans - why does this County? Chapter 1 - Introduction 1.1 Purpose and Authority of the General Plan I wish this section could be expanded to have more vision, and the language about process, politics, and efficiencies were at the end of this list. The General Plan is a vision and values document, and efficiencies are important. Please consider reorganizing this list so that the higher order of values and island visions are at the top of the list, and the administrative aspects of the draft General Plan are at the bottom of this list. D) Are General Plan Amendments (GPA) not allowed by a developer as part of development proposal? I'd appreciate it if this could be explained. If they are not, is a change to Section 3-15 of the Hawai'i County Charter contemplated to allow a GPA as part of a development proposal? Page 239 1.4 Sustainability Principles and Practices. "Prosperity" for whom? Please be specific when terms like this are used. Page 24, Footnote 2 referencing HRS, Section 226-2. Please explain and provide an example when a "guideline may be deviated from without penalty or sanction". I've not heard of this, and would like to understand how and when this has been used. To see this used as a footnote without context is alarming. It's like a get out of jail card, without any definition or description or how, when and where it can be used. 1.6 Grounded Vision and Goals I appreciate the General Plan Vision State, as well as the Sustainable Development and Resilient Communities Goals, but this language and the intent behind it is overly ambitious. There is no sustainable development now that is being built. Perhaps the newest development in Waikoloa, and Waikoloa Village, but not in any other development proposal I've seen. If this is going to be a building principle and goal, each and every developer, including those projects that have been approved years ago, and are on the books as "active projects", need to update their plans, and approaches, and incorporate the "one water" principle. If these projects don't then this General Plan will not have achieved its goal. There is so much language in this draft General Plan that speaks to "incorporating indigenous and contemporary knowledge and placed based practices to direct and manage growth for the health and safety of our communities". However, there is no clear discussion on HOW the indigenous communities will be brought into the Planning process. Please expand on how and what that process looks like. Chapter 2 - Collaborative Bicultural Stewardship 2.1 Introduction. I feel I'm going to say the same thing over and over and over again. I appreciate the language about bringing all people into the Planning process, but from what I've seen since I've lived here, that sure hasn't happened. Certainly, there's collection of comments and concerns from the public, but no real listing and hearing of the comments - by staff, the Leeward Planning Commission and several members of the County Council. So when I read the language in the second paragraph which states that, "the policies presented in this section seek to foster partnerships that are based on multi respect, trust, and shared values", I don't believe it. I can't believe it. Why? Because I haven't experienced it personally or seen it in the various public meetings I've attended. I don't know how this County, and Planning Department believe it' s going to get over the lack of distrust in the Planning process, and those in the management of the Department, and even the current Mayor, when the decision making process feels rigged and corrupt. Why invite people to participate when the developers are already meeting with the Planning Department and are overheard that the project is a "done deal"? Where is the mutual respect and trust? The Planning Department doesn't conduct its own neutral environmental review (which the developer must pay for); instead, it uses the developer prepared environmental documentation, and agrees with it completely. There is no peer review of this information. There is little to no analysis of a development proposal, and all the staff reports recommend approval. Even with such a controversial project like the one proposed above Black Sands Beach. What are the shared values? This is only place where I can make my concerns known about the Planning Department, how its operates, and the culture within this organization, that may have any consequence. When I continue to read language about Page 240 bringing people into the decision making process, I'm appalled, and it does't happen now. Why would I (or anyone else) believe it will happen in the future? Please see my hand written comments on Pages 40-48 of the attachment. I have too many comments to type here, and have scanned these pages. If you have questions about my comments, pease feel free to email me. Chapter 3 - Addressing Climate Change for Island-Wide Health This is a great chapter, and it feels like this is an insert that is now included in all General Plans. It is written very differently than the rest of the General Plan, and is very scientific. Not that that's a bad thing. It just feels very different, and doesn't quite fit with the rest of this draft document. Page 66: Under Conservation, my comment is that cesspools have to be removed immediately. I live 1/2 to 3/4 of a mile above Ali'i Drive. I'm still dismayed that the Leeward Planning Commission allowed a property owner to change a single family house into a bed and breakfast, and all the effluent discharges directly into the ocean. How gross. If the County really wanted to show it's serious about cesspool conversion, it would adopt a moratorium on these kind of commercialization of uses, and not allow an intensification of land uses until cesspools are removed, and a realistic long term solution to sewer connection is adopted and funded by Hawai'i County. Have a backbone people. The ocean can heal itself but we need to help. Please see my hand written comments on Pages 67-71 of the attachment. I have too many comments to type here, and have scanned these pages. If you have questions about my comments, please feel free to email me. Chapter 4 - Sustainable Development and Resilient Communities The introduction in 4.1.1 is really good. It's written very well, and is a clear, and easy to understand presentation of land use planning. Good job!! Table 16: The information is Changing and Aging Population is surprising, in terms of the projected population growth rate of Hawai'i Island. If there's a way to summarize the population shift (in and out migration), demographic changes (Island population growth rate, birth and death rates, and an aging population), that would really get the point across about the types of demographic changes the island has and is expected to experience. Even more critical is the overall growth rate - 35% by 2045? That's a huge figure, and needs to be planned for now with the island infrastructure of roads, water delivery, wastewater treatment plant and landfills expansions, schools, and all levels of hospitals and clinics. Table 17: Infrastructure. Second bullet. What can be done at the state level to remove the state from being involved in County land use issues? Why is the state still involved in these issues? That power should be fully delegated to the locals so the four counties can plan for their own future without working through the state process, especially if that's an impediment for any hearings or approval at the state level. Is there the political will to consider doing this? Is it possible or it this an issue that the State won't release its grip on. Third bullet: What is meant by the "desired density"? I find this kind of language to be troubling as it is quantitative and not qualitative. Please consider terms that are more descriptive without being so restrictive to future plans, and the larger political decision making process (Planning Commission and County Council actions). Page 241 Regulations, Fourth bullet: Same comment about working to amend the State involvement in County land use Planning and plans. Is there political will among the neighbor islands to dissolve this board, and other language and state processes that rightfully belong at the County level? Sixth bullet: Has a TDR program been used successfully in the State? If so, where? It would be grateful to know how this process has worked, and what issues there were with the process. It's an old case from the 1970's, but the one significant TDR program I remember studying was in New York City with the air rights above Grand Central Station. I'm not sure what other cities, and States have used a TDR successfully, and especially for preserving open space. More specifics need to be understood about how such a program would work here. Market Conditions - Sixth Bullet. I find this statement to be an excuse. This happens in Planning. Development applications are submitted, reviewed, processed, and most often, approved. This timeline doesn't always, and rarely meets the market for getting the product - housing commercial space, etc. - online at a time that meets developers expectations. What I find to be very confusing here on this island is projects that are approved, and not built. They stay on the books for a long time, and may or may not ever get built. Why go through the time, money, effort, and public engagement process to secure a land approval entitlement, and not build. The fault lies with the developer, not the Planning staff or the County. Please reconsider revising this statement, as I believe this statement puts blame on the wrong party. It's a risk to develop land. If the developer can't deliver, then that's not the right developer for the project or the neighborhood. I'd like to see some language in this section of the draft General Plan that prohibits or penalizes "land or entitlement" banking. That's a huge issue for this island, and it's not mentioned anywhere in this document. I know the County Council has passed or intends to pass several Ordinances to understand how many previously approved projects are still on the books and have not been built. That's an issue since the land is held by an entity that has secured a Planning approval, the Planning approval doesn't have real teeth regarding any expiration, and the land can't be built on. Let's be honest with this situation, and call for changes to the Planning process with Conditions of Approval that have real deadlines, Project Approvals that have real deadlines, and Developers that are paper jockeys and don't intend to develop. They hold the land hostage, and the community suffers. Please see my comments on scanned Pages 78-82. 4.1.3 Overview of Land Use Designations and Maps The last sentence under Interpretation - is the decision by the Planning Director appealable? If not, it should be. And a fee for this appeal should be established. Objective 13: Really good. Page 89, Resort. Please consider stronger language for 13.44, 13.46 and use "shall' instead of "should". 13.45 would be stronger if "Prohibit" were used instead of "do not allow". 13.48 - What is a clear community benefit? It should be more than money... If it' s money, there should be a program that's created on how this money is used to benefit the community, and the community should be able to direct how this money is used. 13.50 would be stronger if encourage was replaced with "require". Page 90. 13e. Why is the size of 15 acres used for a TOD? It would be great to understand why. Page 242 Page 101, Objective 15 15.2 Why is a "special" permit needed? Is this type of permit discussed or allowed in the County Code? If not, does a new category need to be created? 15.3 would be stronger if "Require" were used instead of encourage. 15.6 would be stronger if "shall" were used instead of should. Actions. 15.b Please clarify what this means. I think it' s the phrase "maximum developable area consideration" that doesn't make sense to me. 15c. Who over sees a County Agricultural Tourism program? 15e. What is the rationale to require an annual reporting of additional farm dwellings? What is the goal of this report meant to accomplish? I don't disagree with it - I want to understand why this is important and how it relates to the larger island issue of housing. Table 28 The Kona community is still very upset about the once free parking lots in the commercial area east of Ali'i Drive now being paid parking. It would be great if the County could create a program to better manage this situation, beyond using the town trolley, or having residents get a discount on parking by providing their personal information (driver's license and credit card information) to get 90 minutes of free parking. I know this could be a multi year discussion, including purchasing land and creating a program to better manage the parking, but it would be a huge win for the County. I don't mind paying for parking, and I'd rather pay for parking that go through another issue of identity theft or hacking. I'm not providing my personal information to an unknown third party to save a few bucks. Page 111, Objective 17 17.4 Replace "should" with shall (active living corridors shall be incorporated...) Page 116, Actions 19a Is the County's Street Design Manual being used now? The working here makes me think it isn't. Page 117, Policies Please consider using "appropriate" instead of "when necessary" for the Street Design Manual. When necessary sounds like it is less likely to be used on a regular basis, and is subjectively applied. Actions. 20a. Please elaborate. What is the program/policy supposed to do or accomplish? Who creates this program/policy? 20e. Is the Complete Streets different from the Street Design Manual? If it is, would this Complete Streets document be in addition to or override the Street Design Manual? Page 243 Page 123, Objective 24. Please consider using "shall" for 24.1 and 24.7. It would make these policies stronger. Page 126, Drinking Water Please consider creating legislation that requires a water study for residential, commercial or industrial developments of a certain size (over 50 residential units, 50,000 sf. for example). This should ensure that water availability is not in question for these developments. Additionally, for projects that are on the books, but have not been built, and any money that has been paid for water credits, this money, and the credits revert to the Department of Water Supply after 5 years if no building permit has been issued. There has to be some way to incentivize development to occur (if that's the intent) and to discourage land banking/holding by entities that type up land without developing it for needed housing. Table 34. Please elaborate about the seventh bullet point under drinking water. What does this mean, and what is the thought process or public policy behind this statement? Wastewater First and sixth built points - consider preparing and adapting a Recycled Water Ordinance for this purpose, and to enact the County's "One Water" scheme. Stormwater Second bullet: Please consider creating a schedule for a regular review of County codes, and codify this so it's a clearly understood and agreed upon, and not something that happens "as needed". Page 130 - Objective 25 25.5 Consider using "require" instead or encourage. Actions 25a. Consider language establishing a built in fee escalator tied to the Consumer Price Index CPI) or Cost of Living Allowance (COLA), whichever is higher, so that fees go up automatically annually without having to go back to Council for this action. Also, consider creating language that creates a schedule for reviewing fees, say every five years, so that this happens as a course of business and is a regular occurrence. If this needs to be codified, please consider language to do that. Objective 26 26.6 Please consider using "shall be" instead or "reasonably possible". That is vague language. 26.12 Please consider using "shall" for backup standby sources. 26c. Same language as 25a about a built in cost escalator, and a schedule of reviewing fees. Page 137, Objective 27 27.7. Same language about a built in cost escalator, and a schedule of reviewing fees. Page 244 27.13 -27.15 Consider "require" instead of encourage or prioritize. Page 142, Objective 28 Policy 28.1 Please clarify if this is an aspect of private development projects. 28.3 Please consider using "shall" instead of should. Page 145. Please check, but I believe the Ukraine-Russia war started in 2022, not 2023. Objective 32 32.6, 32.10, 32.11, 32.15, 32.16. Consider "shall" instead of should. Page 171, 35b, and 351. Please consider creating a timing mechanism for an audit of the park dedication code, and subdivision requirements. Every 10 years? I think establishing a timeframe is good, and should be codified, so this kind of "housekeeping" occurs, and isn't lost or forgotten. 35r. I don't disagree with the statement, but wonder if this is the appropriate section for cemeteries, as the discussion is about Recreational Facilities Siting and Planning. 35y (ii). Consider language establishing a built in fee escalator tied to the Consumer Price Index CPI) or Cost of Living Allowance (COLA), whiter is higher, so that fees go up automatically annually without having to go back to Council for this action. Also, consider creating language that creates a schedule for reviewing fees, say every five years, so that this happens as a course of business and is a regular occurrence. If this needs to be codified please consider language to do that. Page 177, 36c. I don't disagree with this issue, but is the proper location within the draft General Plan for this issue? Objective 37 37.2 - Will this issue (incentive a mix of diverse housing types, including missing middle housing, smaller house designs, and mixed income communities - get relayed to developers? If so, perhaps this is an avenue to pursue for some kind of incentive for developers to pursue so this housing type is built. Built. Built. Built. It has to be built. And language in the conditions of approval has other be included that the project approval expires in X years if no building permit is issued, and acted upon. Page 183, 37f. Please elaborate on this. Does this mean work with communities before a development applications submitted? If so, please say that. If that's not meant, what is meant? 37h. How can this work with SHPD? I'm not against expedited permitting, and would encourage that. I'd also suggest that a higher fee is charge for this service. I would not encourage any fee waiver for in order to get smaller house designs to the community can have greater options in housing. 38.1 Please elaborate on this. Specially, what is the public policy that is to be achieved by this? Is the County trying to understand the age and quality of the housing stock? A little more explanation would make this item stronger. Page 245 38c. I have a real problem with this. It feels like a huge break for unpermitted work. How does the County know when this work occurred? How far back is the County willing to go with building codes to use? I'd really question if this is the route the County wants to take on this. It's unfair to people who get permits, and to use older building codes doesn't make the housing stock better or safer. Please reconsider this option, or create better language for this. Objective 29 39.3 If the County wants to create more affordable housing, I'd suggest looking at something longer than 20 years. If this resets when the house sells, so that a new owner also has a 20 year term of affordability, that's great. But something longer, like 30 years, the term of a traditional mortgage, provides greater certainty to this process. Please also ensure that any revision to Chapter 11, Housing, of the County Code, matches the term here. 39.10 Please use the term existing parks instead of near facilities. If something else is meant by public facilities, place explain that. Chapter 5 - Thriving Diverse, and Regenerative Economy Page 197, Action Item 43d. What department is supposed to implement this? Are new staff members, across all Departments, intended to be hired to accomplish this action? Please explain how this is to be implemented. Page 198. All of items 44.1 - 44.12 are good information and supportive, but don't really "do" anything. Please see my hand written comments on Pages 199-202 and 206 - 208 of the attachment. I have too many comments to type here, and have scanned these pages. If you have questions about my comments, please feel free to email me. Page 205. Items 46.4 and 46.6. Same comment as item 43d. Are these issues the Planning Department is to implement? If not, what department? Are new staff to be hired to implement these policies? Page 209. Please consider using Interrelated instead of interacting when discussing the Hawai'i Tourism Authority. Page 212. Action item 48d. Who or what department developed a stewardship program to identify wahi pana? It would be helpful to have more assignment of tasks to the appropriate department within this document, and ensure that the Department is on board with gaining additional responsibilities. I realize this may be listed in a section of the Plan I haven't read yet; if it is, I will read that section, and perhaps this statement will be answered there. Page 213. Action 49c. Same comment as 48d. Page 213. 49f. Is this a Planning Department issue? If not, please consider being clear about assigning tasks to the appropriate department within this document, and ensure that the Department is on board with gaining additional responsibilities. Page 246 Chapter 6 - Implementation and Monitoring 6. 2 - County Planning System. Third sentence - "the diagram above" . I think this should be below". 6. 2. 2 - Urban Development Plans. Where are these on the island now? Are they is use now? If so, please discuss where they are, and provide a brief history of how they came into existence, how well they are working, and if these plans should continue to be used or phased out. 6.2.3 Special Area Plans. Same question as for Urban Development Plans. 6. 2.4 - Public Agency Functional Plans and Programs. Again, please explain if these plans are in use now, or are prosed by this draft General Plan. It's very confusing for the amount of Plans this County has, and how they are all supposed to work together, and who has authority over these various plans. ONE LAST BIG THOUGHT One issue that I didn't read about, and may be to big to address in a realistic manner, is the reduction of microplastics. They're everywhere, and in so many consumer items. If there's a way to address that, that would be wonderful, but I understand it' s larger than this island or state. Page 247 Table 2: Biocultural Stewardship Opportunities Native Habitat The County can collaborate with the State Office of Planning and Sustainable Development to create models for monitoring the carrying capacity of natural resources. Ongoing conservation work can continue to evolve from species-specific conservation (e.g., Albizia eradication)to focus on ecosystem restoration across multiple land ownership to protect v Hawai'i's biodiversity. Maintaining healthy, native-dominant forests offers immense savings of biocultural and water resources that might otherwise be lost to the impacts of climate change and invasive species, t Conservation lands hold significant value in the water resources they represent. 1 Incentivizing and developing regenerative land uses, such as agroforestry, can provide c (sustainable opportunities to ecosystems and communities. c ' Hawaii can become a statewide adaptation and resiliency leader by focusing on its unique strengths and diversity to evolve with changing realities. Urban forestry can be prioritized or incentivized in the County Code. v Watersheds Establish more place-based watershed partnerships to create unique management plans that incorporate the generational knowledge of those water systems and protect our island's watersheds. l kArkl Strengthen the integration of Hawaiian biocultural resource management and traditional ecological knowledge across County government. ti kr, x.11 r Practice an integrated approach to ecosystem-based collaborative management that considers the entire ecosystem. Watershed protection and management require collaboration and coordination across all levels of government and must include effective community engagement. r\- .t• 54--1s Stewardship Hawai'i Island has a large variation of its unique natural biomes and ecosystems. Ongoing interagency coordination, including consultation with place-based land stewards, cultural and historical advisory groups, and other stakeholders. L\ a Ao.) I The Count/can stake a more proactive role in exercising its protective public trust role for natural and cultural resources. Maintain and increase involvement with existing partnerships and identify new partners that help promote and enhance biocultural stewardship. Collaborate to complete additional EPA-approved watershed plans to increase eligibility for future conservation funding. Cultural & Historic • Preservation of historic properties can enhance the educational, cultural, economic and general Assets welfare of the island. Community Development Plans(CDP)can uplift community values and heritage character. Consult with place-based culture and history advisory groups as well as other organizations that continue to elevate, protect, and maintain community values, heritage,culture, and history. Scenic Character • The County has a strong policy foundation for scenic resources. Scenic resources include historic buildings that contribute to community character and preserve the history of the area. The scenic resources inventory and mapping project can be further developed into a program. r 'V `r'v`. L` L 1.-jr 2. 0 Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship County of Hawaii General Plan 40 Page 248 2. 2 Biocultural stewardship Goal, Objectives, Policies, and Actions Natural and cultural resources are thriving and sustainably managed, preserved, and restored to maintain our unique and diverse environment. Objective 1 Increase the biodiversity and resilience of native habitats. Policies 1 .1 Minimize and mitigate significant impacts, such as degradation, incompatible uses, or other threats, to Native Hawaiian habitats and public trust resources. 1.2 Strive to improve the health of the island's forests, rangelands, watersheds, nearshore environments, riparian areas, and reefs. 1.3 Encourage the preservation and restoration of natural landscape features, such as reefs, beaches and dunes, forests, rangelands, streams, floodplains, wetlands, and aquifer recharge areas that have the inherent capacity to prevent, minimize, or mitigate the impacts of climate change. 1.4 Maintain the shoreline for recreational, cultural, educational, and/or scientific uses in a manner that is protective and respectful of resources and is of the maximum benefit to the general public. 1.5 Increase collaborative efforts to improve coordination to conserve and manage wetlands, streams, J and watershed 13CvL. tLti 7 1.6 ncourage the preservation of native vegetation and open space during development activities. - 1-_7irmprove the use of native or non-native plants of cultural or environmental importance. L. \a- (:\ 1.8 Prioritize native landscaping for all County projects. + p,r l Y C.- 4Le--ti 1.9 . Limit)he introduction and establishment of invasive species. im ti 0 /Maintain a program to identify and protect exceptional trees, groves, or stands of trees. 1.1Encourage and incentivize green belts, tree plantings, and landscape plans and designs in urban areas. r 1.12 Increase collaborative efforts to create and maintain community forests, food forests, silvopasture, u and other agroforestry.V,A ,, 1.13 Incentivize private land management practices that protect and enhance natural resource allies and, when appropriate, pursue the acquisition oflandsIds for the protecion of-natural-resources.--p 1.14 Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to 2.0 Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship I County of Hawaii General Plan 41 Page 249 a) Implement the Hawai'i State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP) b) Better understand and model carrying capacities of the island's habitats and resources c Improve the inventory of forested lands and associated ecosystem services 1, U Encourage the continued identification and inclusion of unique wildlife habitat areas of Native Y' j Hawaiian habitat within the Natural Area Reserve System 7 4-t e) Anticipate future habitat migration, especially wetlands and coastal ecosystems r v).„).; f) Prioritize quantitative wetlan assessment to identify wetlands g) Expand native and/or endemic forest cover h) Improve enforcement for illegal activities that harm or degrade endemic habitats 1.15 Any development will not adversely impact the following resource asset(s): _ 1 D(o) a) Rivers, streams, springs, and other naturally flowing surface water bodies 42.4, b) Anchialine pools and estuaries c) Shoreline setback areas, beaches, and dunes c.L\Altn 1.16 Maintain shoreline setbacks to protect: a) Natural shoreline vegetation; b) Marine turtle nesting beaches/areas; c) Nearshore water quality; d) Structures from the effects of long-term sea level rise; and e) Beaches and shorelines from erosion. 1.17 Allow the redevelopment of existing waterfront commercial structures consistent with the community character to preserve overwater views. wfnc+ U-'r-• cti.u 1.18 Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to maximize water use efficiency and native plants. 1.Wk—'" c% l J te • Actions 1.a Seek partnership opportunities to support wetland identification and assessments. 1.b Review tree survey requirements and amend the Code to incorporate as part of site planning. 1 .c -urrsi ler the establishm(oKlearing limits within the Code and increase tree removal mitigation requirements, limiting the clearing of native vegetation during development. 1.d Revise floodplain management requirements to requir considerationpf nature-based solutions as alternatives for all projects that have the potential to affect oo p ains or wet an s. 1.e Develop priorities for the management of fire-prone invasive species. Ctiy i 1.f Amend the Code to include an appropriate list of invasive species to be removed during development activities, t e. 1.9 Support programs designed to prevent the introduction and establishment of invasive species and the control and eradication of invasive species; particularly those that serve as disease vectors. 1.h Develop buffer policies to protect native forests, wildlife, rivers, streams, coastal waters, and other native habitats. 2.0 Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship I County of Hawaii General Plan 42 Page 250 1 .i Create incentives for landowners to retain and re-establish forest cover in upland watershed areas with an emphasis on native forest species. 1.j Identify partners and support a public awareness and education campaign to elevate recognition of the value of urban trees as essential infrastructure. 1.k Amend the landscape standards in Rule or Code to require the use of native plants for screening or landscaping. 1.1 Amend the Code to incentivize the establishment of threatened and endangered endemic plant species within their habitable ranges during development approvals. 1.m Review the Code and consider amendments to encourage site clustering of development in order to avoid critical environmental areas and assets. l - (y v'1na 1).c: ll.-c4 :3i-\14 41 CC.cv 1.n Develop and establish Open Space Network Overlay for natural landscape features, such as beaches and dunes, forests, streams, floodplains, wetlands, estuaries, or recharge areas that have the inherent capacity to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the impacts of climate change. 1 .o Study, develop, and establish Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zones, either separately or as an overlay district, to guide development within native forests through regulatory measures and economic incentives. 1.p Maintain a program for acquiring and/or restoring wetlands, estuaries, and anchialine pools. 1.q Develop comprehensive programs and policies and provide resources for enhancing urban forestry canopy cover. 1.r Improve urban and community forest management, maintenance, and arboricultural practices. 1.s Increase funding and grants for urban and community forestry. 1.t Support programs to prevent harmful invasive species from becoming established. 1.0 Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to develop a program for the identification and protection of plant species of special status, including plants significant for cultural practitioners. 1.v Support seedbanks of native and endemic plant species, especially species that are threatened or endangered. 1 .w Partner with community groups to apply for funding to restore native habitats including marine, wetland, shoreline, and native upland systems on County-owned or managed lands. 1.x Prioritize removal of invasive species during maintenance of County-owned or maintained properties. 1.y Assess and prioritize County-owned areas for restoration in collaboration with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders. 1.z Review and update the exceptional tree code and inventory to support the protection of native species and habitats. 2.0 Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship I County of Hawaii General Plan 43 Page 251 Objective 2 Preserve and enhance the health and function of watersheds to promote water recharge, improve water quality, and reduce runoff. Policies 1w-{,L f°L,, 2.1 Engage in comprehensive watershed planning to protect all watersheds and identify priority watershed areas to develop or complete watershed management plans and projects. 2.2 \Addres water best management practices and implement plans for non-point source discharges, s i'airrigation flows and agricultural or urban runoff. 2.3 (Jriontizforest and land management above 2,500 to 3,000 feet elevation to ensure effective groundwater recharge. 2.4 Within mauka areas of high rainfall/fog-drip belt, ground disturbing activities such as excessive soil compaction and excessive removal of vegetative cover should be minimized and mitigated consistent with management strategies that encourage the retention of existing forested and pasture areas, reforestation, minimal coverage by impervious surfaces and other strategies that encourage effective infiltration to groundwater. Lk 2. 5 Watershed management planning should recognize the ecosystem service value of watersheds and open space to protect scenic vistas and aesthetic values; water recharge; carbon {°_ sequestration; oxygen production; habitat enhancement and preservation; fire suppression and VY `" fuel load management; soil conservation; preservation of cultural values; and the potential for lV additional public access and recreational opportunities. 2.6 Maintain participation in the development and implementation of the Ocean Resources Management Plan (ORMP), marine zoning plans, Marine Managed Areas (MMAs), or other appropriate tools. 2.7 Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to: a) Implement a comprehensive conservation plan that identifies priority watershed areas for habitat restoration and enhancement. b) Review and designate forest, river corridors, and watershed areas into the conservation district during State land use boundary comprehensive reviews. c) Monitor nearshore water quality and impacts to reefs and marine environments and address land-based sources of impacts. d) Protect and restore wetlands and riparian corridors to ensure more pristine water quality, decrease erosion, and increase sediment management, groundwater infiltration, nutrient/pollutant uptake, soil moisture retention, stormwater abatement, and cultural/community connections. e) Develop'reasonable standards to improve stream and coastal water quality monitoring and encourage local communities to develop such projects. lki0 le 2.0 Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship I County of Hawaii General Plan 44 Page 252 Actions 2.a Review and update the County grading and grubbing ordinances to ensure that they adequately address potential erosion and runoff problems. 2.b Adopt appropriate measures and provide incentives to control point and non-point sources of pollution. 2.c Identify and establish appropriate riparian buffer protection areas around streams, ponds, perennial flowing natural springs, and all springs and reservoirs serving as water supplies. 2.d Support research to identify and refine priority watershed areas meant to enhance groundwater recharge and improve surface water quantity and flows. 2.e Identify and establis (ppropriat)wetland protection areas and regulations to mitigate impacts of development. v ,;;y=c. - 2.f Partner with and supportila d anager to improve infrastructure and grazing management practices for cattle and other ivestoc to promote soil and groundwater retention and mitigate fire risk. 2.g Amend the Special Management Area (SMA) to include wetlands, riparian, and adjacent buffer areas accordingly. 2.h Build community capacity and agency support for Community Conservation Areas (CCAs) as part of stewardship-based efforts. Lxarrmples of community conservation areas Inclur10 food frosts anuf c(nimunity gaidOris. Objective 3 Increase direct community restoration and collaborative efforts to conserve and nourish the island's biocultural resources. Policies v de-v1i 0(_s(-t,,n,, ' 2-.->-•-'u '` , ‘ i,.,-0 1 f 17,.. 3.1 Encourage an overall conservation ethic in the use of Hawai`i's resources by protecting, preserving, and conserving critical and significant natural resources. 3.2 Foster educational activities that promote the importance and value of HawaiTs unique and limited environmental resources. 1 v,5 \S CA,. s ,t -----r 1,,-4.4, b-u. 3„,,, i k JE.--y--A 3.3 Integrate progressive strategies incorporating indigenous and contemporary knowledge and practices to maintain environmental quality at the highest standards, address a changing climate, protect natural resources, and restore eciosystem health for the benefit of present and future generations. k.\_GA.A - .SaAl fy' '4- ' 3.4 Promote and protect traditional exercised rights and customs of Native Hawaiians. 3.5 Promote resource management that is sustainable, responsible, and data driven. 2.0 Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship I County of Hawaii General Plan 45 Page 253 is— i 3.6 Require the management of natural resources in a manner that fully minimizes adverse effects on the environment and depletion of energy and natural resources. 3.7 Ensure that activities authorized or funded by the County do not damage natural resources. 3. 8 Increase community-based stewardship that focuses on management responsibilities and promote community education and shared learning. fh< c ( ' II)Stewardship requires input and participation from the community regarding daily activities,development of policies and programs, and review of proposed projects. 3.9 Improve community planning capacity-building efforts toward coordination, leadership, effective action, connectivity, and impact. v..71 l,l yt 3.10 Contribute to programs for the collection and dissemination of data concerning natural or cultural resources. 3.11 Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to: a) Protect special areas, structures, and elements that are an integral and functional part of Hawai'i's ethnic and cultural heritage. b) Identify and protect wahi pana. c) Promote the preservation and restoration of significant natural and historic resources. d) Aid in programmatic education concerning historic sites. e) Maintain the shoreline area for recreational, cultural, educational, and/or scientific uses in a manner that is protective of resources and is of the maximum benefit to the public. f) Encourage the documentation and preservation of traditional ecological knowledge, identifying best management practices for integration. Actions 3.a Contribute on a regular basis to state or federal Geographic Information System (GIS) data stores and other programs for the collection and dissemination of basic data concerning natural, historic, or cultural resources. 1 3.b Create special (business) improvement districts to engage in environmental research, restoration and maintenance, natural resource management, climate change or sea level rise adaptation, or other purposes to improve environmental conditions and provide community benefit. Objective 4 The historical integrity, character, scenic assets, and open spaces of our communities are protected, restored, and treated as unique assets with significant social and economic value and managed in perpetuity. 2.0 Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship County of Hawaii General Plan 46 Page 254 Policies 4.1 Require public and private developers to provide historical and archaeological surveys and cultural assessments, where appropriate, prior to the clearing or development of land".4:1-€44-theLe-. ar e land und- . ..- - "• •- • , • icaLsignifi-cance.— 4.2 Increase public access opportunities to scenic places and vistas. t ,v 1 k 'l , GLit`lt, tL1 4.3 Public access to significant historic sites and objects should be acquired, where appropriate. 74. 4 Encourage the restoration of significant sites. bGOA , 4.5 The County shall use and promote the use of interpretive signs and/or other appropriate methods that are in keeping with the character of the area to recognize landscapes, sites, buildings, and objects of historic and cultural significance. 4.6 Historic preservation shall represent the full range and diversity of the multi-cultural heritage of Hawai'i Island. 4.7 Maintain an inventory of significant cultural and historic sites and districts compatible with that of the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD). y c;f 4.8 Ensure that projects requiring preservation plans are identified on subdivision maps and plan approval site plans. r c{. ,l cs..41 .` . tv\Y v to a • .• 4.9 The County shall develop comprehensive management plan for historic and cultural resources that are on County-owned or managed properties. 4.10 Maintain the characterpf County-owned historic structures and bridges, as appropriate. - 4.1 1 Identify outstan ing natural or cultural features, such as water courses, fine groves of trees, heiau, and historical sites and structures on subdivision preliminary plat maps. 4. 12 Original place names should be restored wherever possible. Actions 4.a Seek private-public partnerships to maintain and steward the preservation of sites, buildings, objects, and landscapes of significant cultural and historical importance. 4.b Maintain Certified Local Government status and maximize funding opportunities. 4.c Support the identification of Heritage Landscapes, Corridors, Areas, and Centers. 4.d Support the development of multi-cultural centers. i; 4.e Support historic district surveys for our urban centers. • 4.f Work with SHPD to establish a framework and database for Cultural Impact Assessments. 4.g Continue the dialogue between State and County agencies to identify guidance to protect Native Hawaiian customary and traditional practices. 4.h Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to develop design guidelines for designated communities containing significant historic buildings, sites, or landscapes. 4.i Assess and prioritize County-owned lands for historic site restoration in collaboration with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders. 2. 0 Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship I County of Hawaii General Plan 47 Page 255 4.j Create and maintain a GIS overlay of historic districts. 4.k Educate and encourage property owners to nominate structures and sites to the State and National Register of Historic Places. 4.1 Support property owners with the preservation of historic structures that are on the State and National Register of Historic Places. 4.m Provide real property tax incentives for historic properties, including commercial properties. 4.n Support the development of a multi-sector public education program regarding historic and cultural sites that target key partners such as the visitor industry, real estate agents, site developeris', consultants, schools, youth groups, and civic organizations.j , Objective 5 Protect, restore, and enhance our communities' unique scenic character. Policies t.. 51. Consider structural setbacks from major thoroughfares and highways and establish development r VII and design guidelines to protect important view planes. 5.2 ' Preserve transportation corridors that have important scenic, historic, recreational, natural and/or cultural resources that enhance the character and scenic resources of communities. 5.3 1i Protect the views of areas end with natural beauty by carefully considering the effects of proposed construction and compatibility during all land use reviews. Encourage the design of developments and activities that complement the natural beauty of the island. 5.5 Maintain a program to identify and protect viewing sites on the island. 5.6 Preserve and protect culturally significant lava tubes, caves, or other geologic features determined to be significant by a governmental agency or plan. ul Nr) Actions C Y7 5 a Prinnti7e maintaining the views at scenic overlooks with a frequently maintained vegetation management program v.inch includes eradication of invasive species. Coordinate this work with a regular roadway vegetation management maintenance program. 5.b Develop and establish view plane criteria, rankings, and regulations to preserve and enhance views of scenic or prominent landscapes and/or corridors from specific locations and coastal aesthetics. 5.c Develop a process for reviewing and revising guidelines for designating Natural Beauty Sites. 5.d Establish a Scenic Resources Protection Program to identify, inventory, and protect areas of significant beauty. The program could include recommendations from the Scenic Resources Inventory and Mapping Project(2016). 2.0 Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship County of Hawai'i General Plan 48 Page 256 Climate Adaptation OpportunitiesTable15p By leveraging the following opportunities, Hawaii County can build resilience against the impacts of climate change, protect its natural resources, and enjre the well-being of its residents. Water Resources Protecting and r watersheds will improve water quality and availability. Management Promoting( no Water strategy can create cross-agency collaboration to identify and address overlapping challenges in tin 'o sea level rise and building more resiliency into infrastructure across water, wastewater and stormwater sectors Agriculture&Encouraging the cultivation of climate-resilient and diversified crops to enhance food security. Food Security • Promoting agroforestry practices in agricultural areas can improve soil health and crop resilience. Regenerative agriculture practices can reduce dependency on externa}inputs and improve soil health. Infrastructure& • Retrofitting or relocating bridges and roads provides an opportunity to reduce GHG emissions by reducing Urban Planning miles traveled. Retrofitting can be accomplished within existing maintenance schedules of County facilities for increased resilience. Reducing the risks of flooding, landslides,and fire reduces the cost and GHG emissions associated with the reconstruction of infrastructure and need for alternative routes, which increase emissions during road and bridge outages. Increasing access to multimodal transportation options can help reduce VMT. Proactive maintenance of parks and recreational areas can continue to provide equitable access to resources in the face of changing landscapes. Limiting new development in fire a areas would reduce economic loss to landowners and businesses. Fire risk reduction around communities potentially limits fire spreading into upland areas, reducing fire- t, driven forest loss. 1 o n • Build and upgrade infrastructure to withstand increased flooding and sea level rise_ I A^V Incorporate green infrastructure solutions such as permeable pavements and urban green spaces to manage stormwater and reduce the urban heat island effect. J y Implement zoning and land use planning policies that•eo i climate risks and promote sustainable t 6(A-A-4- development. Social Equity Engage communities in planning and decision-making processes to ensure that adaptation measures are socially inclusive and culturally appropriate. Increasng equitable resilience to climate hazards will benefit historically marginalized and frontline c Mies and those that are vulnerable to climate change impacts. Energy& Investin renewable energy sources to reduce GHG emissions and increase energy resilience. Transportation • P =' • -.-nergy efficiency in buildings and transportation to reduce overall energy consumption. n an -'public transit systems and infrastructure for active transportation to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and improve air quality. Biodiversity& • Managed retreat strategies and new shoreline setback regulations would expand open space along the Ecosystems shoreline to support coastal ecosystems such as anchialine pools. ? 7 7r i ?A-r- Supporting conservation programs can help protect native species and habitats from climate change impacts. Strengthening measures to control and eradicate invasive species can help protect local ecosystems. Enhance habitat connectivity to allow species to migrate in response to changing environmental conditions. Education& Build capacity for local government agencies by providing training and resources that improve their ability Capacity to plan and implement climate adaptation initiatives Building Collaborate and coordinate with the County's Office of Sustainability, Climate, Equity, and Resilience OSCER). Support research and monitoring efforts to better understand climate impacts and the effectiveness of Develop adaptation measures. Develop and implement educational programs to raise awareness about climate change and adaptation i1Jr ' l' 3s strategies. 3.0 Addressing Climate Change for Island-Wide Health I County of Hawaii General Plan 67 Page 257 3 .2 Climate Change Goal, Objectives, Policies, and Actions Ensure a just transition to a climate resilient island by addressing the causes and impacts of climate change through incorporating equitable climate mitigation and adaptation priorities into policies, programs, infrastructure, and decision- making. Objective 6 Ensure that climate actions are equitable and uplift marginalized and disadvantaged communities. Policies rtsjik 6.1 Prioritize and support community-based organizations, businesses, and programs through County purchasing and procurement policies. 6.2 Prioritize and support Low- and Moderate-Income (LMI) communities through tax incentives, grants, and financial support provided to community members, organizations, and other related groups. „ya,ak t kr v ,,A#4- 6.3 Prioritiz rojectsjin communities that experience disproportionate impacts of climate change. 6.4 Consider financial and time barriers, geographic constraints, and language accessibility when conducting community outreach. 6.5 Improve the communication of climate risks and opportunities for adaptation efforts. 6.6 Support communities to become fire-adapted as they prepare for climate change. 6.7 Expand urban forestry benefits to disadvantaged communities. 6.8 Support social science research and applications to help address environmental justice and intergenerational equity. 1.9 Integrate Native Hawaiian traditional knowledge and practices in planning for the impacts ofc______climate change. Actions 6.a Increase transparency of government actions by creating a climate change dashboard and portal 0 to track the implementation of climate action. 6.b Engage communities by incorporating place-based knowledge and qualitative data to guide implementation priorities and decision-making. 3.0 Addressing Climate Change for Island-Wide Health I County of Hawaii General Plan 68 Page 258 6.c Promote funding opportunities for LMI communities to implement climate action, including interactive videos and workshops that meet communities where they are. i; ,,_ -fe..., 1 7`4 7 Objective 7 5 Yi Reduce the County's carbon footprint to net zero emissions by 2045. Achieve a 100 percent renewable-powered County fleet by 2035.u. /r..c4-4 Support the statewide effort to achieve 100 percent renewable ground transportation and 100 percent renewable energy by 2045. Ci,, Policies 7.1 Incentivize efficiencies that integrate affordable housing and carbon neutrality. 7.2 Require energy-efficient designs in all new County facilities and upgrade existing facilities with 0f energy-efficient systems. r3yOrt. 1 7.3 erort building code updates that incentivize energy-efficient designs and climate-neutrallbuildingmethodsandmaterials. 7.4 Encourage and incentivize the use of technologies, techniques, and materials in building design, construction,andremoval that minimize the ecological footprint over the life cyclecle of the structure. 7.5 Encourage and incentivize large developments to meet energy sustainability certification C sparr a 7.6 ve fo energy sustainability certification for new County buildings or when renovating existing buildings for County use. 7.7 Prioritize energy-efficient designs, energy-efficient systems, and waste reduction and/or reuse at County facilities. 7.8 Evaluate Capital Improvement Projects for energy efficiency and carbon reduction, including the cost savings related to improved design. 'C`Nl.",- i 7.9 Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to develop comprehensive and coordinated strategies promoting energy and water conservation to strive for climate resilience. 7.10 When evaluating public investments, including acquisition, siting, and design, consider the potential of natural areas for carbon sequestration and provide climate adaptation and mitigation opportunities. 7.1 1 Integrate and incentivize urban forestry into all scales of planning where feasible and compatible with infrastructure. L .A ' drn.62,.., 7.12 Develop carbon-emission standards and an incentive program aimed at achieving County carbon emission goals. --t-1-...1-,-- u- - 7.13 All County facilities shall report energy usage annually. . ;. 74-A'}- 7.14 Program the upgrading of the County vehicle fleet and equipment to net zero emissions. %-,-(. 1.6'-' 7.15 The Mass Transit Agency shall operate a net zero emissions fleet by 2035. 3.0 Addressing Climate Change for Island-Wide Health I County of Hawaii General Plan 69 Page 259 7.16 Prioritize the installation of electric vehicle chargers at community facilities, for both County vehicles and public parking. 7.17 All new County vehicle purchases, including average mpg, emissions equivalent per gallon of fuel or kWh), and estimated annual operation and maintenance costs shall be reported annually. 7.18 Prioritize the accommodation of active transportation options as part of the planning and design of all roadway improvements to encourage non-motorized forms of transit. Actions 7.a Develop and provide incentives for new development/redevelopment to pursue certification for green" site planning, construction, and post-construction practices. 7.b Adopt policies and strategies across all County departments to reduce GHGs and become more resilient to the impacts of climate change. t -y w-f.u--+_7, c*- - ye%/cZ^"clotG^^.- 1 S' 7.c Develop a County purchasing policy to prioritize roducts ith low emissions over their lifecycle•r and resiliency to the impacts of climate change. tw„}..) t 7.d Develop and implement incentives for energy-efficient or green design standards. 7.e Prioritize urban tree inventories for primary urban areas such as Downtown Hilo, Waimea, and Kailua-Kona. ot 7.f Develop procedures to include street trees as part of public capital improvement projects. 7.g Develop energy benchmarking standards for County buildings. 7.h Develop and implement an electric vehicle charging plan with a station network map that identifies regional gaps in service. \,,,..oAAr_ ko-a , \,- - 't 'tr 7.i Create a fleet transformation plan for each County department. LAr 6\41. `' A_ 7.j Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to increase community-wide awareness and accessibility regarding reducing transportation costs and emissions (e.g., the impact of keeping tires inflated on the efficiency of cars) through education awareness programs. 7.k Develop and implement a streamlined framework to report annual energy use of all County facilities and all new County vehicle purchases. Objective 8 Improve the identification of climate change threats, assessment of potential consequences, and evaluation of adaptation options. Policies Climate change threats 8.1 Use accurate and up-to-date, peer-reviewed scientific predictions and observations related to climate change impacts to guide adaptation policy and land use decisions. i .- tc_ 8.2 Support local and regional climate change modeling and monitoring programs. jkU" &1-"'"4"4' R1 f/M+-K'ztM W l l r4 -,s11 Y 1 3.0 Addressing Climate Change for Island-Wide Health I County of Hawaii General Plan 70 v. caw Page 260 8.3 Collaborate with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to monitor impacts that may be specific to Hawai'i County due to its unique exposure to climate change and sea level rise impacts. 8.4 Improve assessments of climate change threats and potential consequences to determine specific geographic areas impacted and projected financial cost. 1{ Assessment of consequences 8.5 Climate change adaptation strategies shall be considered in County budgetary, land use, and other decision-making processes. 8.6 Implement sea level rise planning and policies for public infrastructure projects and other projects with a low tolerance for risk. ("-tkA`k. , t r-.c (n OA{n 8.7 Prioritize the preservation and restoration of natural landscape features, such as reefs, beaches 7 and dunes, forests, rangelands, streams, floodplains, wetlands, and aquifer recharge areas that have the inherent capacity to prevent, minimize, or mitigate the impacts of climate change. Evaluation of adaptation 8.8 Develop adaptation strategies (e.g., protection, accommodation, managed retreat, and preservation) for capital improvements to ensure that the project's useful life and service expectations can be met in the face of projected climate change impacts. 8.9 Design and maintain infrastructure, including roads, buildings, and stream crossings, to accommodate increases in flooding and geologic hazards such as landslides. 8. 10 Partner with communities to develop adaptation strategies (e.g., protection, accommodation, managed retreat, and preservation) for vulnerable areas including conducting vulnerability assessments and assessing land use and land availability. 8.11 Partner with government (e.g., State Office of Planning and Sustainable Development [OPSD]), private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to analyze conservation buffers to accommodate shifting native habitats impacted by climate change, particularly wetlands and high-elevation forests. 8.12 County departments show integrate economic development, equity, and sustainability outcomes into their annualgoafs and reports to the Mayor. Actions 8.a Conduct detailed vulnerability mapping of existing and planned infrastructure. 8.b Support and partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders on research for adaptive policies and technology that increase resilience. vrLc 8.c Incorporate appropriate green building or climate-resilient specifications into competitive bids. 8.d Adopt a land acquisition program with potential leaseback options for the purchase of hazard- prone locations or those with beneficial attributes for climate adaptation and mitigation. - vwrp(-e 8.e Collaborate with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to implement environmentally beneficial upgrades for wastewater, irrigation, and/or landscaping, including sea level rise, storm, and other climate change considerations. r -n 3.0 Addressing Climate Change for Island-Wide Health I County of Hawaii General Plan 71 Page 261 Table 18: Land Use Opportunities Infrastructure • County departments are encouraged to develop a 5,2lialaQrtive infrastructure capaciIan with prioritization of projects in their respective functional plans and based on desired growth areas anprefd erred density as identified by the General Plan. Coordinate with the Department of Health (DOH) to address unique land use situations on the island related to individual wastewater systems(IWS)and prioritization of resources. Increase housing density by utilizing additional dwelling units(ADU)in existing residential districts served by adequate utilities. Facilitate innovative public and private partnerships in infrastructure investment for targeted growth areas. 6,\4"...\p / i1 County departments can provide greater flexibility in privately owned and maintained infrastructure concurrency requirements. Regulations Remove barriers to residential development in the appropriate districts to reduce development timelines, increase housing stock availability,and increase affordability. Review and update the Building and Zoning Codes to allow for more flexibility. Collaborate across State and County agencies to facilitate efficient and effective land use processes. Advocate allowing for County-initiated State Land Use Commission District Boundary Amendments to meet the preferred land use patterns consistent with the General Plan Land Use Maps. Program the initiation of rezoning in targeted growth areas. Support and streamline the process of infill development. The most direct role the County plays in economic development is through land use regulation (e.g., permitting efficiency,transparency,predictability,and certainty)and property tax policy. Invest in the provision of strategic infrastructure including roads,water,and/or wastewater improvements to encourage higher density development in UGAs, Work with the State Historic Preservation Division(SHPD)to determine when there is a need to review a project related to the identification of cultural sites and practices. Work with SHPD to create standards related to the assessment of a project's effects on cultural sites and practices. Establish a framework for cultural impact assessments including recognizing findings and recommendations of prior cultural impact assessments within the same ahupua'a for new projects. Funding& /-a Partner with the State and other counties to create a capacity-building plan for County departments, local developers, Financings , & and community stakeholders. Leverage different financing mechanisms to support development and redevelopment,including Business/Community Improvement Districts,Tax Increment Financing,Community Facilities Districts,and Opportunity Zones Seek and pursue additional mix of funding opportunities and tax incentives for(re)development, Market Diversify economic drivers by exploring and growing the county's range of sectors and markets. Conditions g Utilize creative solutions and partnerships to encourage,support,and prioritize infill development before expanding toV greenfield areas. — ltitr'--' / Ck f•-• 62 AS ‘41A4 1 p 9 Make vacant and underutilized government-owned lands available for affordable housing or other(re)development, especially in or adjacent to urbanized areas with adequate or expandable infrastructure. Seek to acquire land for affordable housing developments and other redevelopment opportunities, Land Use Elimina un ermitted non-conforming uses and develop proper land use patterns to ensure urban areas are used r. Compatibility accordingly. efi 7 Wit 196 Gft Dv Strategically use zoning to ensure proximate compatible and complementary uses that improve the vitality of urban areas 0 Regularly evaluate supply and demand to prioritize needed land use challenges. Demonstrate smart growth development. Public Encourage affordable housing projects to meet the Engagement needs of neighborhoods(YIMBY). 0Applystrategiestoengagecommunityand stakeholders that go beyond legal notice fir,,r tl{r.;l lric a 5.1}'-,==it„i,.t'r , i'-V c•mn,.ni1'' , requirements. C, :;r 6t,r a I s.. :rl,r t;hl...,,-„ I•,. It:S^7 Reinforce the alignment between community values and the General Plan and Community Development Plans. 4.1 Land Use I County of Hawaii General Plan 78 Page 262 i ___ 4.1 .2 Land Use Goal, Objectives, Policies, and Actions We strategically apply progressive land use strategies incorporating indigenous and contemporary knowledge and place-based practices to direct and manage growth for the health and safety of our communities. Objective 9 Maintain community character and land use compatibility. Policies 9.1 The development of commercial facilities should be designed to reflect the character of the community while providing desired services and mitigating impacts on the surrounding environment. 9.2 In those cases where provisions of the zonin. • subdivision code are inconsistent with the character of surrounding neighborhoodsolllan or Planned Unit Developments (PUD) that maintain consistent village/town character should be encouraged. 9.3 Zoning, subdivision, and other applicable ordinances shall provide for and protect open space areas. ixscv f''t- KJ r-6.--.1-34,1 C( t)L-W,., Ca, 9.4 Support mechanisms, such as PUD and Cluster Plan Development(CPD),that group parcel density to reserve openspace, recreational areas, or scenic viewsheds. ('Moi 6'tPpCSc„A,:L. -6.12- 9.5 6 9.5 Discretionary permit applications for uses that may impact view planes to and along the coastline, and areas of natural beauty should take into consideration visual impact assessments and propose conditions to mitigate scenic impacts where appropriate. L Code- 9.6 In the review of discretionary permits, consider land use compatibility to ensure proximate compatible and complementary uses and appropriate mitigation measures. Encoura-gdevelopers of new urban areas to place utilities underground. u 9.8 Route selection for high-voltage transmission lines should include consideration for setbacks from major thoroughfares and residential areas. Where feasible, delineate energy corridors for such high-voltage transmission lines. {-' 5 tS - `J' S -'- „ Actions 9.a Develop a process for County-initiated State land use boundary reclassification to best align State Land Use with County long-range plans. 9.b Create village plans for unique urban areas that include considerations for urban design, aesthetic quality, and the protection of amenities in adjacent areas through landscaping, open space, and buffer areas. 4.1 Land Use I County of Hawaii General Plan 79 Page 263 I 9.c Develop subdivision standards that make a distinction between agricultural, rural, and urban land uses. e.(kbev-Aikt, 9.d Define the types of open space that are sought to be protected and establish standards to be applied to ensure its protection. e.t,.66,1 . jf t' G "+-- C4&3 'v IA 11 CA rN tiE- r2 '1 U D 16`( i 45.42 9 w t` !P. e Conduct a review and re-evaluation of the real property tax structure to simplify and assure compatibility with land use goals and policies. L-vim.)1 LA-0,27)OW Ulr 9.f Study the feasibility, issues, and opportunities related to the development of a TDR program to strategically preserve open space and achieve density to remain consistent with the land use pattern in accordance with the General Plan Land Use Maps. Ulna c"-t' n"i v‘...2-4-t- Objective 10 Increase the integration of natural systems planning. Policies 10.1 Protect and enhance Hawai'i's beaches, shoreline, open spaces, and scenic resources. AZ1--4 10.2 During discretionary permit applications, the Planning Director may equine a pedestrian, equestrian, and/or bicycle path when it is possible and safe to connect to existing or future open space, drainage, or active living corridors. G ,. " doss,' 10.3 Proposed discretionary permits forrge development projec 00+ units) in the North Kohala, South Kohala, North Kona, South Kona, and Ka'u Districts should be designed to be as water neutral as reasonably possible through water conservation, recharge, and reuse measures to reduce the water footprint. Stiff 10.4 Identify tstandinq natural or cultural features, such as water courses, fine groves of trees, heiau, and historical sitesand structures on subdivision preliminary plat maps. v.,-'4- ,5 rr -e.e t S JpLAC -)21C-4--4'n1) •-•(-'a LA.Lbr 0ActionskQti - 10.a Amend the Zoning Code to create a category for lands that should mostly be kept in a natural state, but that may not be in the Conservation District, such as certain important view planes, buffer areas, and very steep slopes. The zoning category should include reasonable land uses. 'im 10.b Amend the Zoning Code and Subdivision Code to allow CPDs to be applied to all zoning districts with appropriate building site standards. 10.c Collaborate with the State Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (OPSD) to create criteria to help identify and protect Native Hawaiian customary and traditional practices. Objective 11 Increase equitable planning and decision-making processes. Policies 11.1 Ensure there is necessary and adequate on-site infrastructure for development projects-may J include but not limited to water, wastewater, and multimodal infrastructure. Jam` 4.1 Land Use I County of Hawaii General Plan 80 Page 264 I 1 _ Ensure affordable housing requirements that meet the demand created by the development. The County may 'moose incremental and conditional zoning based on performance conditions4.)./.;,that focus on addressing the impacts of the proposed development. Yr111.4 Concurrency reviews should incorporate reduction in vehicle miles traveled to mitigate traffic impacts and achieve sustainability and demand management goals. Actions 11.a Collaborate with the SHPD to create clear guidance to be used when reviewing a project related to the identification of cultural sites and practices. 11.b Implement efficiencies to make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost-effective. 11.c Evaluate concurrency requirements that would impose reasonable and fair infrastructure concurrency requirements on all developments. 11.d Amend the Zoning Code to allow for PUD to become administrative permits and subject to the approval of the Planning Director. .E:---6 ,24 pkit.A..4..`*1-A,-5 11.e Provide flexibility within the Zoning Code to accommodate emerging new industries through Use Permits or allow new uses that do not conflict with the purpose and intent of the existing zoned district. h,d-. In.._ 4'1-4A-4-€4^A-- 64...4' /1'y`.."`G d'e k - - Z-G t 11.f Update traffic impact analysis requirements to include alternative evaluations to the level of service outcomes, such as vehicle miles traveled and alternative transportation metrics. Objective 12 t c t-; v i - I s top , t henReducethethreattolifeandpropertyfromnaturalhazardsanddisasters.pc . Policies 12.1 Enact additional land use and building structure regulations in areas vulnerable to severe damage due to the impact of waves or inundation. 5 LP C11-1 12.2 Review land use policy as it relates to floodplains, high surf, and tsunami hazard areas. 7 12.3 Consider natural hazards in all land use planning and permitting. itl"12.4 Discoura intensive residential development in areas of high volcanic hazard. 12.5 Discourage public investment/infrastructure that supports increases in density in high-risk hazard t ``) areas , while allowing such investment to support existing residents and facilities.A.P y" 12.6 Reduce development intensity in identified high-risk hazard areas. 12.7 Incorporate hazard mitigation strategies into policies and planning decisions using the most conservative models in delineating hazard areas. 12.8 Encourage the development and implementation of Community Wildfire Protection Plans, Firewise Community Certification, and public education programs for communities with high wildfire risk. 12.9 Encourage the use of natural features such as sand dunes, xeriscape, or native plants to provide buffers from hazards. 4.1 Land Use I County of Hawaii General Plan 81 Page 265 12.10 Traditional ecological knowledge and methodologies should be considered to mitigate, adapt, an. estore areas prone to natural hazards and disasters. Q, l 12.11 multimodal trails for firebreaks and possibly emergency evacuation routes where feasible. 12.12 Power distribution should be placed underground when and wherepracticaL Actions ct-o4.0 '(cQA. kt,Je.,g am 12.a Update the Building Code to maintain cost-effective standards to resist hazards and reduce carbon footprint. 12.b Adopt natural hazard overlay zones and set appropriate conditions for land use, siting, and design within high-risk hazard zones. 12.c Amend the Zoning Code to establish building setbacks for coastal and inland cliffs. 12.d Collaborate with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)to regularly update flood studies and refine flood zone designations. 12.e Review and amend land use policies to reduce risk from hazards including but not limited to floodplains, high surf,tsunami, landslides, erosion, wildfires, and high-risk volcanic hazard areas. 12.f Study the feasibility, issues, and opportunities of a TDR program to incentivize development away from high-risk hazard areas. 12.g Amend the Zoning Code to include a science-based shoreline setback to address climate change and sea level rise. 4.1 land Use I County of Hawai'i General Plan 82 Page 266 44.f Partner with business associations, realtors, and the chamber of commerce to recruit small-scale manufacturers to establish retail locations in village and town centers to support reinvestment and match potential tenants with local landowners. 44.g Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders e.g., University of Hawaii, business associations,etc.)to convene business development events island-wide. Objective 45 Incorporate resiliency, diversity, and innovation in County programs, plans, and research to support healthy economic development and revitalization. Policies 45.1 Increase County resources and actions devoted to strategic planning, interagency coordination, training and expertise, and capital improvements. 45.2 The Capital Improvements Program (CIP) shall improve and increase the capacity of existing and future commercial and industrial areas. j[ L45.3 __IVIeitain.__Maintain. a program for updating the zoning code to accommodate emerging industries and 9.-' technologies consistent with other goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan. 45.4 Support lease terms and extensions on State and Department of Hawaiian Home Lands(DHHL) M7 lands that provide opportunities to improve or rehabilitate existing commercial and industrialYt zoned areas. tch`,c Cccf- v,cs-f 45.5 Encourage land uses that allow for small-scale manuf ct rrers in retail establishments that enhance and are balanced with the County's natural, cultural, and social environments.04.i 45.6 Maintain lans and programs to foster sustainable business development opportunities ocusing on regenerative agriculture, green technologies and building, innovation and technology, creative industries, and regenerative tourism. 45.7 Improve opportunities for multimodal transit that improve the quality of access to existing job centers. 45.8 Provide technological infrastructure that increases the competitiveness of businesses and allows them to thrive in all parts of the island. 45.9 Expand opport;unities for in.qovation and tech-based businesses. lace• C-041.3 t 7 45.10 Promote a dis'inc,-tiive b rranrd for the island of Hawaii including distinctive, regional identities as an entity unique within the State of Hawai`i. 9 1 A A-C4o0-,..44.-t.«t • 45.11 Encourage the development of economic opportunities through the utilization of by-products from various industries. 45.12 Continue to encourage the research, development, and implementation of advanced technologies and processes. 45.13 Promote Hawaii Island as a center for natural scientific research. 5.0 Thriving, Diverse, and Regenerative Economy I County of Hawaii General Plan 199 Page 267 45.14 County departments should integrate economic development, equity, and sustainability outcomes into their annual goals and reports to the Mayor. Actions 45.a Collaborate with emerging industry leaders to identify needed infrastructure and services to support economic diversification. 45.b Monitor trends and identify business needs, strengthen existing industries, and diversify the economy by attracting emerging industries. j/..trl-.- ? W'Lo 45.c Collaborate with the private sector to identify business needs, strengthen existing industries, and diversify the economy by attracting new endeavors. 45.d Remove regulatory barriers that restrict entrepreneurial endeavors, such as zoning restrictions for home-based businesses that do not negatively impact the infrastructure network or the character of the neighborhood. 10V' (L.. 1(j ,.(r .qi 45.e Build capacity for implementation and economic developmentUhin the target industry clusters identified by the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS). 2 45.f Promote cross-sector linkages between Hawaii Island's anc or an opportunity industries to grow the market for local products and services. C 45.g Expand the research and development for energy and technology industries. 45.h Assist in the expansion of emerging industries through the development of marketin plans and programs. I 3 `1 v-'f ot, Q GtV... v (t , IJ 45.1 Develop a mark4E strategy that includes houeng, a skilled workforce, quality of life, and a healthy regulatory environment to attract emerging industries. 45.j Assist in the development of a film and creative industries program to market Hawaii Island sites and coordinate activities. 56L.. S,s kJ-C. 45.k j C- 45.k Partner with government (e.g., DOT, DBEDT, etc.), private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to monitor export capacity for Hawai'i Island. urt.• rte3 45.1 Partner with government, privand nonprofit agencies siness associations, realtors, chambers of commerce, etc.), communities, and other stakeholders to streamline regulatory processes and create incentives for@rban renewal rehabilitation, and/or redevelopment p/programs in collaboration with communities, busines s, and government agencies. v-' c,-,r7- f‘ 45.m Program regular collaboration with the University of Hawaii at Hilo, Hawai'i Community College, the Natural Energy Laboratory at Hawaii Authority (NELHA), and other agencies to expand the research and development industry for sustainable and equitable economic development. 45.n Increase grant writing capacity and management and pursue grant funding to supplement County critical needs. 5.0 Thriving, Diverse, and Regenerative Economy I County of Hawaii General Plan 200 Page 268 1 5.3 Agriculture and Food Systems As the General Plan envisions a prosperous Over the years, several key trends have emerged future for Hawaii Island, the economic section in our agricultural landscape, reflecting the sheds light on the pivotal role of agriculture and evolving needs of the local economy. First, there our local food system. Agriculture holds a special is a growing emphasis on sustainable and place in Hawai'i's history and continues to regenerative practices. Farmers, ranchers, and represent a vital economic sector of Hawai'i food producers recognize the importance and Island. The agriculture sector encompasses the necessity of preserving the island's delicate growing of crops, raising livestock, aquaculture, ecosystems while maintaining productivity. pc ,,,, and forestr These businesses and organizations Furthermore, Hawai'i Island has witnessed a ependent upon good management of resurgence of small-scale farming and diversified V the natural resources on which they depend, not agricultural enterprises. As consumers to only for their benefit as agricultural enterprises increasingly prioritize local, organic, and but more importantly for the long-term health culturally significant food options, a network of and future productivity of these resources for the farmers' markets, farm-to-table initiatives, and benefit of both the broader community and community-supported agriculture programs future generations who continue to be the oo s have flourished. This trend promotes food on the ground stewarding these precious sovereignty, strengthens local supply chains, and resources. buik ` 0. •4-)f /'fosters a connection between producers and A sustainable local food system is fueled by consumers. U CG-`n strong investments in the agricultural sector and In recent years, the island's food systems have ongoing partnerships among farmers, ranchers, also experienced a renaissance driven by processors, retailers, communities, government, agricultural tourism and the burgeoning farm-to= and non-government organizations. This section fork movement. Visitors and residents alike seek is centered on supporting the regenerative immersiveexperiences that celebrate the island's agricultural sector to sustain local food systems rich agricultural and paniolo heritage. From farm that enhance the environmental, economic, and and ranch tours and agritourism ventures to social health of the island. farm-to-table restaurants and food festivals, Hawai'i Island's food systems have attracted 4 ; those seeking authentic and sustainable M experiences. It .- , ' , 1 QjAstheGeneralPlanchartstheQconnic course w for the future, it recognizes the immense 9. 11iik 44 potential of agriculture and food systems on r Hawaii Island. The Plan seeks to bolster and 4 diversify agricultural businesses, encourage 44 it innovation and technology adoption, support value-added processing, and promote market n access for local producers. By fostering 4 ;` collaboration among stakeholders, investing in infrastructure, and embracing regenerative practices,the Plan envisions a vibrant agricultural a sector that sustains livelihoods, strengthens theIN, . - n 5.0 Thriving, Diverse, and Regenerative Economy I County of Hawaii General Plan 201 Page 269 I local economy, enhances the flow of ecosystem is Kava (Awa), a medicinal plant that has the services from our working lands, and preserves potential to be a viable cash crop. Locally, small the unique heritage of the island. growers as well as a few large growers are producing Kava. Vanilla beans, cacao, Local Production and Consumption nutraceuticals, hardwood forestry products, and Since 2015, agriculture on the island has faced medicinal plants are other types of high-value numerous challenges, including a volcanic cropsthat hold much promise for growth. Hawai'i eruption in the Puna district, flooding and Island holds most of the State's acreage in emdamage from Hurricane Lane in 2018, and the commercial forestry (20,921 acres) and pasture discovery of coffee leaf rust in October 2020. 552,091), U These incidents, along with ongoing issues r impacting pastures and cropland, such as invasive pests, all contribute to the hardships experienced by ranchers and farmers. Despite suchtria Hawaii Island continues to be the 7 State's rimary producer for a variety ofo i + 4r important crops, including coffee, flowers, foliage, landscape, cattle, macadamia nuts, papaya, and tropical fruit. These commodities and others have growth potential.There are new high-value crops that have the potential to be successfully cultivated. One such high-value crop Figure 8 Summary of Hawaii Island Agricultural Footprint and Changes Between 2015 and 2020' Acreage r Change(2015 to 2020) Cra. Ty.e 2015 auto MIMS. % AquiLt,itur', 165 152 3 1 63 EMI Commercial Forestry 21, 061 20,921 140 1 Dal IIKIEIIIIIIEIIEI rl isieziositi Diversified Cron 3266 4,343 1077 33 Flowers ,Foil,; /Landsca.e IIIMMEII 5 Macadamia Nuts 21,359 21,405 46 0 Sugarcane 14 14 N/A Tropical Fruits MIMINIEBBEIll 1.67 MIMI Crop Total 61,150 62,460 ' 1310 EMI Total 615,474 614,551 I -923 0 6 2020 Update to the Hawaii Statewide Agricultural Lard Use Baseline,UHH https://hdoa.hawaii.govlsalubreoorts! 5.0 Thriving, Diverse, and Regenerative Economy I County of Hawaii General Plan 202 1 Page 270 I 46.12 Increase public-private partnerships to develop and support community-based food systems. 46.13 Support the development of agricultural worker housing. Fn,.J 1 v c/ 1 :c Actions v-- S J9 Oji . r7 46.a Advocate for the State legislature to amend the Hawaii Revised Statutes to include green waste, composting, and fertilizer yards for commercial use as permitted uses on agriculturally zoned land. 46.b Advocate for the State DOH to streamline the composting permitting process. 46.c Support the use of USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service assistance. 46.d Advocate for the State to incentivize local food production through expanded tax credits. 46.e Support training and capacity building related to the requirements of the Food Safety Modernization Act. 46.f Invest in a crop suitability tool, including existing and projected water demand. . 46.g Develop a food self-sufficiency strategy, including community-based food system assessments . and monitoring local food production and consumption. 46.h Develop and implement an emergency food plan that could be deployed in the event of a natural or economic disaster. I:Art.1 t `7 46.i Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders for carrying capacity studies of fisheries and the establishment of State community-based subsistence fishing areas. 46.j Coordinate with the University of Hawai`i at Manoa College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources to expand the farm food safety education program. 46.k Support the State Department of Agriculture programs for the prevention, early detection, rapid response, and control of harmful invasive species from becoming established and impacting commercial agriculture. 46.1 Support State Department of Education Farm to School programs and other programs designed to provide locally produced food to schools. 46.m Adopt procedures to allow forthe development of community gardens and edible landscaping on public lands (e.g., through Friends of the Park agreements). Cu."..J4 lL `t2 00-,) •:f/ 2-1C4 46.n Provide services and frameworks to support the formation of new commodity groups and other organizations, such as farmer cooperatives. 71 46.o Amend the de to expand the designated list of parks authorized to allow farmers' market permits to include parks in rural areas that lack appropriate commercial-zoned lands for farmers' markets. 46.p Support and advocate for streamlined long-term leases for agricultural parks. 46.q Continue to evaluate and update the County's tax reduction programs to ensure that tax incentives for agricultural land use result in actual public benefits and promote local agricultural production where possible. 46.r Create a real property tax exemption for farmers entitled to federal crop loss insurance. 5.0 Thriving, Diverse, and Regenerative Economy 1 County of Hawaii General Plan 206 Page 271 Objective 47 Increase interagency coordination, programs, and policy initiatives that improve local agriculture infrastructure. Policies 41--tc...q---, 1/ ' ,u pi;c it the creation of water cooperatives supported ith financial sources, such as community facilities districts (CFD). Cooperative users should be responsible for the r development, maintenance, and repair of agricultural non-potable water systems. — `r t% a-- y- S . 47.2„, Where the County has replaced surface water sources with groundwater sources to meet afeU/// y' 11LIs/ Yr( Drinking Water standards, the County should consider repurposing the surface water sources for agricultural use where the allocation is supportive of the ecosystem. 47.3 Advocate for more flexible and innovative wastewater systems to serve agriculture facilities. 47.4 Support the adaptive reuse or rehabilitation of existing infrastructure or buildings for Irl agricultural processing, including but not limited to the development of commercial kitchens, 1 processing, storage, or distribution facilities. 47.5 Promote the development of a locally grown building material industry through streamlined permitting or building code flexibility. i 47.6 Support research and development that promotes local produce while removing interstate marketing restrictions. 47.7 Encourage the use and optimization of the export capacity of airports and harbors for local goods. 47.8/ Support research and development of viable biofuel projects that will supply renewable transportation fuels or power for Fiawai`i Island in ways that are community-supported, sustainable, ecologically sound, and complementary to food production. 47.9 Support the continued operation of the USDA Daniel K. Inouye U.S. Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center facility. 47.10 Support the development of processing and manufacturing facilities. Actions 47.a Map existing and proposed agricultural infrastructure and facilities. 47,b Expand programs and optima to allow for agricultural irrigation water. 47.c Develop criteria to determine appropriate places for agricultural parks, including the availability of potable water. 9. 47.d Account for verified agricultural water usage in the County Water Use Development Plan. 47.e Support the expansion of State agricultural water systems in productive agricultural areas 1 47.f Investigate the restoration of ditch systems to meet future agricultural needs. 1 47.g Amend bulk regulations including building materials for agricultural facilities and infrastructure. 5.0 Thriving, Diverse, and Regenerative Economy I County of Hawaii General Plan 207 Page 272 I47.h Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to study the feasibility of building code amendments and structural integrity testing for locally produced building materials, prioritizing non-native plant species. 47.i Evaluate grubbing and grading ordinances as they pertain to agriculture including the creation of exemption categories for water storage and aquaculture. 47.j Seek State legislation or rulemaking to allow local agricultural producers to make direct sales to consumers fa' t County-designated farmers' markets at a lower general excise tax rate. 47.k Evaluate the-68dAnd statutory amendments to allow farmworker housing to be developed without requiring the housing be sited on the same parcel (i.e., TMK) of the working subject farm. 47.1 Amend the Code to remove barriers to allow for off-site directional signage to promote local farms engaged in direct sales and other permitted visitor-related businesses while minimizing scenic impacts. 47.m Amend the Code to include provisions for suitable agricultural infrastructure projects financed by County bonds and liens on real property of participating agricultural stakeholders, whether such assessments on TMKs involve contiguous parcels of lands encumbered under an Agricultural Improvement District. 47.n Incentivize and streamline the process to develop agricultural worker housing on- and off-site. 5.0 Thriving, Diverse, and Regenerative Economy ' County of Hawaii General Plan 208 Page 273 DeVera, Ashley From: jlkinkona < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 3:47 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: my comments on the Hi County Draft General Plan 2045 At a recent question and answer session that I attended at Yano Hall on 9/17/24, a HI County Planning official mentioned that Hawaii imports 90% of its food. This alarming fact has been known for over 20 years and yet it did not seem to be given much attention in this Draft GP. How come? So my comment would be that Hawaii County needs to work towards cutting our food imports by 25% by 2030 by encouraging everyone to grow some of their own food on their property including residential property. A few papaya trees, an avocado or lemon tree and even a small veggie garden all help to contribute toward food independence. Food security should be given top priority in the GP and food production should NOT be limited to only Agricultural land. Most of the imported food is processed and full of toxic ingredients and should not even be allowed into Hawaii. Native Hawaiians pre contact sustained themselves on food from these islands. Shame on us for straying from this practice. Mahalo, Josephine Keliipi Kailua Kona Sent with Proton Mail secure email. Page 274 DeVera, Ashley From: R Rogers < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 3:03 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Plan changes Please keep everything the way it is. Jim Rogers 1Page 275 DeVera, Ashley From: R Rogers < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 3:06 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Planned changes Please keep things the way they are. Jim Rogers 1Page 276 DeVera, Ashley From: Akuakea < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:07 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Kevin Hill Testimony 1. I, and many of my friends living in this county object strongly to being force fed things we did not write or have meaningful input into. This plan does not represent my values and goals, not that of any of the friends that I have discussed it with. 2. Who wrote this plan? Where did it come from? I want to know who the author is who starts a valid discussion off with a radically different value system for individual liberty, personal choice, and the role that individuals have in solving their own problems, meeting their own needs and that of their communities. Show us the genesis of the authorship and lets have a talk! A government or an administration,who means and acts honestly, has nothing to fear, and consequently has nothing to conceal;" Thomas Paine,The Writings of Thomas Paine 1 1774-79 4. This general plan is eerily similar to other plans in Texas, Washington State, Idaho and Montana. Why is that? Again, who authored it? I reject it outright. I don't even want to edit it. I want a document authored here, by real people dealing with all the issued that have been created over the last decades here - housing, agriculture, economics including tourism. I will participate in drafting such a plan that serves us. 5. I resent the prolific use of the term 'sustainability' that means more control from outside "Stakeholders" who get to decide how we take care of our own and where and when? Sustainability means to me something vastly different than whoever is promoting this document. Sustainability is about stewarding the environment for the purpose of self-sufficiency and caring for the needs of this island population in a way that honors the unalienable rights enumerated in our constitution both of the Kingdom of Hawaii and of America. Any plan that violates those rights is unlawful on its face no matter how nicely the unlawfulness is couched in words like 'sustainability'. 6. Climate changes are the core justification for this document from beginning to end. We, the occupants of the county will determine how we will be prepared for and respond to changes in our climate or other living conditions. We do not all see things the same, this topic is the object of much debate and it is not acceptable to assume we all agree on the choices and decisions incumbent on us regarding the data. There are stages in the business of serious life in which to assume is cruel,but to deceive is to destroy; and it is of little consequence, in the conclusion,whether men deceive themselves, or submit,by a kind of mutual consent, to the impositions of each other." Thomas Paine,The Crisis This document is intended to deceive; and its assumptions and its deception will destroy liberty, destroy private property, tax and fine in an attempt to control and coerce. The core thoughts are anathema to our governing laws and must be rejected in favor of a document created here with public input and sincere and truthful intent. "The Life of the Land is Perpetuated in Righteousness" and the death of it is perpetuated by deception. Start over. We want to write our own general plan. Sincerely, Kevin Hill Page 277 Sent with Proton Mail secure email. 2Page 278 DeVera, Ashley From: Akuakea < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:16 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Kimberly Hill Testimony on General Plan Aloha Planning Department, I reject this plan. I don't want this future for myself or my children. It uses words like sustanability and stakeholders and climate crisis as clubs to beat the good people of this island into 'clusters', creates more regulated or unusable areas under the pretense of environmental protection when clearly these are jargon words to thinly veil a future of control by unelected 'stakeholders' over our land, our properties, our economy, and our resources. Sounds suspiciously in lockstep with the UN treaties, and the WEF. Sounds like Tyranny in pretty words like they so often are. I don't consent to any of it. We will draft our own plan. I reject this one absolutely. Sincerely Kimberly Hill - 5th generation Hawaiian. Page 279 DeVera, Ashley From: Lamaku Mikahala Roy < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:59 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Fwd: Letters From the Queen 07-04- 24 -- Kaloko Stand Attachments: Royal_Coat_of_Arms_of_Hawaii.svg.png; Letters from the Queen 07- 04-24.pdf Attention: Ms. April Surprenant Director of DRAFT PLANNING Hawaii County General Plan Greetings Ms. Suprenant: I am HRH Kalomana'ulaokalaniki'eki'eloakeahi'ena'enamauokalaulani Lamaku and Kahunanui of Ahu'ena Heiau, Kamakahonu, Hawaii. Ahu'ena Heiau at Kamakahonu is the First Capital of the Kingdom of Hawaii unified by Kamehameha the Great in 1810. I inherited the Spiritual Care of Ahu'ena Heiau in 2005 from my Father, Alii Kahu David Keli'ihelemauna Roy, Jr. and Akua, the Divine Creator of Heaven and Earth. In 1810, the Kingdom of Hawaii was born by the unification of the Hawaiian Islands by Kamehameha the Great. In and since 2010 MIRACLES have arrived for 'Oiwi and all mankind. These are Spiritual Conveyances from our Creator by the Ancestors of 'Oiwi (the First People of Hawaii and the Pacific). At Kamakahonu, Hawaii Akua Manamana Loa expresses that this is Keaulama --the Era of Light where Most High God PROMISES TO HEAL THE PLANET AND ALL LIFE UPON THE PLANET. As a participant in public planning meetings such as in the Kona Community Development Plan, I have given voice &testimony on the MIRACLES AT KAMAKAHONU to the County over time. On September 16, 2024 I did so again at Yano Hall in Captain Cook, Kona at a County Hearing for the General Plan. Present to receive this testimony were the planning staff and members of the CDP Kona Action Committee chaired by the respected Charles Young. I bring laud to Chair Young for the truth is that there are many'Oiwi and non-'0iwi who are burdened by the CDP. Mr. Young brings Hawai'i's 'Oiwi cultural spirit to the fore of all meetings he conducts. The Community Development Plan was created in Pittsburg, U.S. for planning in our sacred Islands. It is rigid and breathes NOT in the Spirit of the Ancestors of 'Oiwi who have always been poised and present for us -- Oiwi in our land. The Ancestors may now deliver Akua's sacred wisdom to mankind to bless Hawai'i and the Earth. 1Page 280 Akua calls for the creation of the Kingdom of God upon the Earth beginning in Hawaii by the restoration of the Kingdom of Hawaii by Akua's chosen Leader, King Edmund K. Paki -Silva II Nou Ke Akua Ke Aupuni o Hawaii. King Edmund K. Paki --Silva II is Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau, Kauoha Ka Mamaka o Ka Lama. On July 4, 2024, the attached letters flowed forward to their appointed destinations. Now take in this history that brings forth change in Hawaii that necessitates the pre-emption of this General Plan. Representatives of the U.S. government have known as Hawaii leaders have known of this vital history since March 3, 2021. Waiwai Mau Ke Kumu Akua is Our Infinite Source HRM Ka'I-omana'ulaokalaniki'eki'eloakeahi'ena'enamauokalaulani Lamaku Kahunanui Ahu'ena Heiau Kamakahonu, Hawai'i Kauoha Ka Mamaka o Ka Lama The Divine Order of the Steadfast &Worthy Two Who Uphold the Highest Light of Akua at Kamakahonu From:TheQueenoftheKingdomofHawaii@Keaulama.com 2Page 281 TT / f keg +t., 1GA£AOKA A1,0°. ' !`` By New Breaths in the Restored Kingdom, Aloha Mau, I declare this copy to be the full and accurate account of My Letters on July 04, 2024 beginning with my letter to Paul Scolari,Ph.D. of the NPS. Please receive &peruse all content included here. Replace and discard all pages of the original document you received by mail and/or email with pages of this document only. Mahalo, HRM Ka'I omana'ulaokalaniki'eki'eloakeahi'ena'enamauokalaulani Kahunanui Ahu'ena Heiau Kamakahonu, Hawai'i Ka Mamaka o Ka Lama Divine Order of The Steadfast&Trustworthy Ones Who Uphold the Highest Light of Akua at Kamakahonu Page 282 f;°, I1,..... (. 4ii. 11,1N et y- ,.. _.. ," 1 Halau No'eau Kahelemauna House of Wisdom of the Mountain-Roaming Chief Pu'u o Kaluaokalani Dr. Scolari: The purpose of this letter is to confirm my receipt of your letter of June 21, 2024, yesterday, 6/27/24 and to respond to it by special delivery mail today June 28, 2024. Accompanying my letter, find attachments pertinent to the subject with which park staff, members of the community, special support groups &individuals, and yourself are well acquainted by numerous meetings with me over time. The content of your letter is not the outcome that I, HRH KA' I 0 MANA'ULAOKALANIKF EKI'ELOAKEAHI'ENA'ENAMAUOKALAULANI LAMAKU, representing THE KINGDOM OF HAWAII RESTORED AT KAMAKAHONU was expecting. The course of action you outline in this communication is REJECTED by the KINGDOM OF HAWAII RESTORED AT KAMAKAHONU THE FIRST CAPITAL OF THE KINGDOM OF HAWAII. In the 1970's my parents and other honored citizens are celebrated as Founders of Kaloko-Honokohau National Cultural Park to protect these royal lands from tourism development. The park has adopted the concept of a 'Spirit Day' to be held annually to honor the Honokohau Advisory Commission whose work in the seventies brought this park into being. As recently as in a meeting held with you on my parents' birthday, 4/26/24, witnessed by staff member Keola Awong,you conveyed an understanding of how the care of these matters should be spiritually, peacefully, and respectfully conducted. You indicated your understanding and agreement with my suggestion that by abiding by the guidance of the Divine Creator received by SPIRITUAL MIRACLES from the Ancestors of'Oiwi, the call for the NAGPRA process is null and void. These burials at Kaloko-Honokohau are previously known and NOT INADVERTENT by report of the Ancestors of'Oiwi who Page 283 serve the Divine Creator of all mankind at Kamakahonu, the First Capital of the Kingdom of Hawaii of Kamehameha the Great. This Miracle of Spirit thereby cancels the call for the NAGPRA process at Kaloko Park. In all our meetings,you have never disagreed to this pronouncement. AS OF THIS DAY, 6/28/24, ALL WHO REST AT KALOKO-HONOKOHAU NHP AND ALL WHO LIVE AND REST IN HAWAI'I, FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE 5o TH STATE, ARE RESTORED TO THE CARE OF AKUA MANAMANALOA IN HIS CHOSEN KING AND DECLARED QUEEN: HRH KING ALI'I NUI MO`I EDMUND K. PAM - SILVA, II AND HRH KA' I 0 MANA'ULAOKALANIKI'EKI'ELOAKEAHI'ENA'ENAMAUOKALAULANI QUEEN OF THE RESTORED KINGDOM OF HAWAI'I. 0 ke 'Ano o Ka Lahui i ka 'Ohana The Character of the Nation is Seen in the Family Olelo No'eau Alii David Keli'ihelemauna Roy, Jr. HRM Ka'I- OMANA'ULAOKALAN I KI'EM'E LOAKEAH I'ENA'ENAMAUO KALAULANI LAMAKU KAHUNANUI AHU'ENA HEIAU KAMAKAHONU, HAWAI'I KAUOHA KA MAMAKA 0 KA LAMA THE DIVINE ORDER OF THE STEADFAST &WORTHY TWO WHO UPHOLD THE HIGHEST LIGHT OF AKUA AT KAMAKAHONU copies: HRH KING ALI'I NUI MO`I EDMUND K. PAKI - SILVA, II, KAHU AHU'ENA HEIAU KAMAKAHONU, HAWAI'I Richard Tyler Paikuli-Campbell The Board of Trustees Queen Lili'uokalani Trust The Board of Trustees Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop The Board of Trustees Charles Lunalilo Trust HPD Group 70 2024 Mayoral Candidates of Hawai'i County Page 284 October 2.2017 The National Park Service preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park Service for enjoyment, education and inspiration of this and future generations. Gratefully, I submit the following comments, requests and edification to the Kaloko- Honokohau National Historical Park Draft Foundation Document. I am the daughter of the late Kahu David Kahelemauna Roy, Jr. and I am his designated successor as Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau at Kamakahonu, Hawai'i. Kamakahonu Hawai'i is the first Capital of the Kingdom of Hawaii of the Hawaiian Islands unified by Kamehameha the Great. It remains the abiding Capital of the Kingdom of Hawaii, country occupied. To cite the words of this Draft Report that close the paragraph on page 8, I concur to say that SPIRIT of the first people of the Hawaiian Islands today IS strong and growing stronger in every moment. I suggest that you make the change of the term Native Hawaiian to `Oiwi for `Oiwi is the accurate word by our ages-old and true language that identifies the first people of the Hawaiian Islands and our Pacific Family. Over time, this term for its accuracy has risen in use by the people and has supplanted the use of Native Hawaiian. SPIRIT, and along with it, clarity and understanding by `Oiwi increases continually in Hawaii. We are a living people with living ancestors of SPIRIT seeking truth of our past for our health and well-being and the health and well-being of our descendants and our lands. My heart and words are a part of the SPIRIT Report. My Kealakehe Intermediate Class Students are they whose poetry graces the pages of this esteemed report. A supportive member to those of the Kaloko-Honokohau study commission, I became a member of Na Kokua Kaloko-Honokohau non-profit organization and later served as a member of the Na Hoapili Kaloko-Honokohau Advisory Commission. I am One who speaks in appreciation of wisdom and truth. My time and essence are a continuing part of the concern for the care and safekeeping of Kaloko-Honokohau even as it has moved into the care of the NPS. I was in high school when Kupuna of Hawaii island and beyond came to meet with my father to discuss the large matter of an impending threat by hotel development to Kaloko- Honokohau in the early 1970's. It's thanks to the dedication of these people, others called upon by Akua along the way, and then to a growing group of us who absolutely stayed the course of effort to protect this area that this park is here. These Kupuna made public stands to engender support against development of these lands so very important to the Lahui—to the nation of Hawaii. They gathered in united impassioned plea to protect their family members, their ancestors and ancestors of`Oiwi who lay buried at Kaloko. The facts were that numerous burials lay at this historic land place Kaloko-Honokohau. Why? There was greater history yet to know. `Oiwi and our descendants are called to know our complete history which is borne of SPIRIT in steps taken by our ancestors. My older sister, Lynette `A'alaonaona Roy Akana conducted the valued Mo'olelo Ha'i Waha o Kaloko-Honokohau,Oral History of Kaloko-Honokohau, in a day when such work was rare. She interviewed po'e (the people) of the area whose story and"way" of telling their story grows more valuable over time. She was a consultant, then, to the Page 285 Honokohau Study Advisory Commission and until her untimely passing, served as I did with dedication to the `efforts of the people.' My sister's report cites the importance of the religion of`Oiwi to the history of the people at Kaloko-Honokohau. This park is here — it was one option to provide safety to this area. This was a movement of and by SPIRIT. This remains a movement of and by SPIRIT at Kaloko-Honokohau and throughout the Hawaiian Islands. The determination and conviction in the hearts of the Kupuna I was among for a long time was palpable and convicting. I feel this impetus even now as I write these words to aid in the carriage of integrity in this Foundation Document. This is evidence of SPIRIT ongoing. I am Lamaku Mikahala Roy, Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau at Kamakahonu, Hawaii. Lamaku is the title my Ancestors give me that I am to use for it, in addition to the title of Kahu, is the identity of my Station in Spiritual Authority. I stepped off the NPS Na Hoapili Advisory Commission for the increase of the call for service to Akua as Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau at Kamakahonu. Attached please see articles related to Kamakahonu, my father's and now my steps in time in our precious homeland. In 2014 I was asked to conduct a blessing for the purpose of landscape clearing near and above Kaloko pond. In prayer to the Ancestors for guidance for this blessing, I was given the following spiritual conveyance by the Ancestors of`Oiwi. By Akua, Divine Creator, it is now the time to reveal this conveyance to the parties involved and now to the writers of this Foundation Document. Here is the direct evidence that SPIRIT is real, ongoing and defines the foundation of these royal lands for `Oiwi and all people of the Kingdom of Hawaii, for people of the United States of America who will visit here and all people of the world. Lamaku Mikahala Roy Kahu,Ahu'ena Heiau Kamakahonu,Hawai'i Halau No'eau Kahelemauna House of Wisdom of the Mountain-Roaming-Chief Land Archive for Kamakahonu Page 286 Words of Light of the Ancestors of `Oiwi as conveyed to Lamaku Mikahala Roy, Kahu Ahu'ena Heiau Kamakahonu, Hawai'i 11/3/14 You ask most respectfully for assistance related to a blessing sought for the National Park at Kaloko-Honokohau. May we add what we are endowed with to share. Some of the Ancestors who rest here at Kaloko are they who were involved with great challenge in history. There was a battle here in a time of political change. Kamehameha the Great sought to procure the faith of the hearts of the people in him as ruler and as the representative of Most High Akua rather than in the traditions that upheld the flow of life for kaulike in the Puuhonua. Many who believed in the ages-old traditions of Spirit in Hawaii fought when the call for such action occurred. Many lost their lives believing the way they were taught to believe. It would be a blessing pleasing to Akua Manamanaloa that this aspect of the history be told in order to bring blessing and healing to all who lost their lives here and to their descendants. That those of both sides be comforted and blessed and harm absolved and resolved by Akua is the desire of Akua and these Ancestors. This so that the Light brought forward will bless and heal all in the related Ghana — every single One of their bloodlines. This, so that the Light brought forward nurture the wellness, accord and peace of all who come here, work here, appreciate here from wherever they are. That the Light borne of this blessing from Akua aid and serve in the enlightenment presently occurring in all of Hawaii for the world. Page 287 0.0IT OF T. 4P ,II ~ gym PARKNATIONAL o United States Department of the Interior SERVICE, a ' NATIONAL PARK SERVICE gi'ch 3.Aga Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park 73-4786 Kanalani Street,# 14 Kailua-Kona,Hawai`i 96740 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1.A.2 February 29, 2024 Re: Initiation of Consultation for Inadvertent Discovery subject to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act(NAGPRA) 43 CFR Part 10 Aloha, The purpose of this letter is to initiate consultation regarding inadvertent discovery of a possible tooth by a visitor at Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park(Park). The National Park Service (NPS)was notified on Friday, February 23,2024 that a Park visitor found a tooth at the surface of the sand beach near Kaloko Fishpond Picnic Area and turned it over to the Hawaii County Police Department(HPD). The NPS is in communication with the HPD awaiting confirmation if the tooth is a human tooth and when the HPD will return the tooth to the NPS. More information will be shared with you as the NPS gets it from the HPD. If the tooth is determined to be a human, the park will address the find under NAGPRA as an inadvertent discovery. Like previous NAGPRA repatriations at the Park, the NPS is amendable to reburial of the tooth in an appropriate location within the Park pending the completion of the NAGPRA process. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Tyler Paikuli-Campbell of my staff at 808- 329-6881 ext. 1213 or tyler_paikuli-campbell@nps.gov. Sincerely, On behalf of Paul Scolari Superintendent Page 288 SERV PANIC United States Department of the Interior ter , NATIONAL PARK SERVICE CPIS 'Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park 73-4786 Kanalani Street, # 14 Kailua-Kona,Hawai`i 96740 I\RE I'L 1 RI I-FR 10 I \2 June 21, 2024 Re: Update regarding Consultation for Inadvertent Discovery subject to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) 43 CFR Part 10 Aloha, The purpose of this letter is to update you regarding the inadvertent discovery of a possible human tooth by a visitor at Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park (Park). The National Park Service (NPS) was notified on Friday, February 23, 2024, that a Park visitor found a tooth at the surface of the sand beach near Kaloko Fishpond Picnic Area on Thursday, February 22, 2024. Rather than turning the tooth over to the NPS, the visitor contacted the Hawaii County Police Department (HPD) which took possession of the tooth. We requested that HPD transfer the tooth to the NPS immediately upon ruling out criminal involvement. After repeated requests for the transfer of the tooth from HPD, the NPS was informed the responding HPD officer determined it was not human and disposed of the tooth. The NPS received photos of the tooth from the Park visitor. The quality of the photos makes it difficult to determine if the tooth is human, although a trained osteologist indicated it may have indeed been human, possibly a baby molar. Because it was an isolated find with no direct context to an archeological site, the NPS cannot determine its age. This is not the outcome the NPS was expecting. We communicated the gravity of this error to the HPD. They have requested that the NPS provide training to patrol officers on the inadvertent discovery of human remains within national park units. As part of this training, the NPS will provide information to HPD on the importance and requirements of NAGPRA, including the use of trained professionals for the identification of human remains. We regret we were not able to make a positive determination about this tooth and treat it with the care required under federal law for human remains. Page 289 If you have any questions, comments or would like to discuss this matter, please contact Tyler Paikuli-Campbell of my staff at 808-329-6881 ext. 1213 or tyler_paikuli- campbell@nps.gov. Sincerely, pesos g...,....e_i_ Paul Scolari Superintendent 2 Page 290 414114 411, N 4 1( ) 3-,i c ,0 1 r,' y... ,.-.. ._.. map Y.I 4,4„1,4AL1,1, Respectful Greetings to the Trustees of the Queen Lili'uokalani Trust, Aloha hou mai. Attached and presented here is great sacredness for your care. Here are words from Akua by the Ancestors of'Oiwi at Kamakahonu. Akua intends to Heal the Planet and All Life Upon the Planet in Keaulama (The Era of Light). These sacred words of light from the Ancestors confirm the reality of'Oiwi Spirituality from the beginning of time to the present day. Akua requires a moratorium on all new developments within 40 miles between Kaloko-HonokOhau and HOnaunau in Kona, Hawaii. Akua guides that I am to present this Divine Wisdom to ALL 'Oiwi. I am FIRST called to share with ALL 'OIWI -- encouraging them to be the first to receive their history& to peacefully take their stand in their light and power as the collective. We are called to share this great information with humanity that honors and obeys the commands of the Divine Creator of Heaven and Earth. KA-LUA-O-KA-LANI means THE SECOND HEAVEN. KALUAOKALANI IS THE ANCIENT NAME FOR HAWAII Here is why this land is the home of Ka 'Io,the Heavenly Hawk. Here is why Keolonahihi and Kaluaokalani have ALWAYS BEEN FIERCELY PROTECTED by the Great Ones of Highest Light Who Rest at Mauna a Wakea and by their Descendants in this present day. Kona 3 LLC is a Developer and Applicant for the development of expensive housing on lands within the Kauoha Kapu Kanaha—the 40-mile land area Divine Creator orders to be secured in peace with no new development upon it. We're asked to follow Akua's guidance for the protection of Mauna a Wakea, the planet and all life upon the planet. The developer's application will be voted upon by the Hawaii County Council in the main meeting chambers at the West Hawai'i Civic Center on Tuesday, 7/10/24. Here is the call to ALL 'OIWI of the planet and in Hawai'i to submit their testimony in writing to counciltestimony@hawaiicounty.gov by noon -- 7/9/24. 'Oiwi and Supporters Page 291 of'Oiwi may send their testimonies in support of Akua's Kauoha and against plans for Kona 3 LLC. All 'Oiwi and Supporters are invited to SIGN UP online for this hearing- via Zoom by direct phone request to the Office of the County Clerk at (808) 961-8255 or by sending a request by email to councilremotetestimony@hawaiicounty.gov no later than Noon on 7/ 9/24. HERE &NOW is the call for the collective, peaceful, powerful stand to honor Akua's guidance to 'Oiwi to OBEY AKUA. Here is the call to protect the 40 miles in Kaluaokalani completely honoring the Sacred Message of Akua. KEEPSAKE OF HONOR FOR"THE NEW GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD" Gifts for all 'Oiwi and Supporters of Oiwi are being created! Tee Shirts as gifts at no charge in all sizes for Keiki through Kupuna will carry the treasured Divine History for ourselves and generations to come. THE ANCESTORS SAY THAT KEAULAMA IS "THE NEW GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD." Mililani i Ke Akua Ka'I omana'ulaokalaniki'eki'eloakeahi'ena'enamauokalaulani Lamaku Kahunanui Ahu'ena Heiau Kamakahonu, Hawai'i Kauoha Ka Mamaka o Ka Lama The Divine Order of the Steadfast&Worthy Two Who Uphold the Highest Light of Akua at Kamakahonu Page 292 ii0+Ifer i ll =— / y'y 4FLi(1M1 ht. Respectful Greetings to the Trustees of the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estate: Aloha hou mai. Attached and presented here is great sacredness for your care. Here are words from Akua by the Ancestors of'Oiwi at Kamakahonu. Akua PROMISES to Heal the Planet and All Life Upon the Planet in Keaulama (The Era of Light). These sacred words of light from the Ancestors confirm the reality of'Oiwi Spirituality from the beginning of time to the present day. Akua requires a moratorium on all new developments within 4o miles between Kaloko-Honokohau and Honaunau in Kona, Hawai'i. This Kauoha o Ke Akua at this time speaks to only new development within the 4o miles between Kaloko and Honaunau. Akua guides that I am to present this Divine Wisdom to ALL 'Oiwi. I am FIRST called to share with ALL 'OIWI -- encouraging them to be the first to receive their history&to peacefully take their stand in their light and power as the collective. We are called to share this great information with humanity that honors and obeys the commands of the Divine Creator of Heaven and Earth. KA-LUA-O-KA-LANI means THE SECOND HEAVEN. KALUAOKALANI IS THE ANCIENT NAME FOR HAWAII Here is why this land is the home of Ka 'Io, the Heavenly Hawk. Here is why Keolonahihi and Kaluaokalani have ALWAYS BEEN FIERCELY PROTECTED by the Great Ones of Highest Light Who Rest at Mauna a Wakea and by their Descendants in this present day. Kona 3 LLC is a Developer and Applicant for the development of expensive housing on lands within the Kauoha Kapu Kanaha - the 4o-mile land area Divine Creator orders to be secured in peace with no new development upon it. We're asked to follow Akua's guidance for the protection of Mauna a Wakea, for the planet and all life upon the planet. Page 293 The developer's application will be voted upon by the Hawaii County Council in the main meeting chambers at the Hilo County Building on Tuesday, 7/10/24. Here is the call to ALL 'OIWI of the planet and in Hawai'i to submit their testimony in writing to counciltestimony@hawaiicounty.gov by noon -- 7/09/24 'Oiwi and Supporters of'Oiwi may send their testimonies in support of Akua's Kauoha and against plans for Kona 3 LLC. All 'Oiwi and Supporters are invited to SIGN UP online for this hearing -via Zoom by direct phone request to the Office of the County Clerk at 808) 961-8255 or by sending a request by email to councilremotetestimony@hawaiicounty.gov no later than Noon on, 7/09/24. HERE &NOW is the call for the collective, peaceful, powerful stand to honor Akua's guidance to 'Oiwi to OBEY AKUA. Here is the call to protect the 4o miles in Kaluaokalani completely honoring the Sacred Message of Akua - Most High God for All Believers of the World. KEEPSAKE OF HONOR FOR"THE NEW GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD" Gifts for all 'Oiwi and Supporters of Oiwi are being created! Tee Shirts as gifts at no charge in all sizes for Keiki through Kupuna will carry the treasured Divine History for ourselves and generations to come. THE ANCESTORS SAY THAT KEAULAMA IS "THE NEW GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD." Mililani i Ke Akua HRM Ka'I omana'ulaokalaniki'eki'eloakeahi'ena'enamauokalaulani Lamaku Kahunanui Ahu'ena Heiau Kamakahonu, Hawai'i Kauoha Ka Mamaka o Ka Lama The Divine Order of the Steadfast &Worthy Two Who Uphold the Highest Light of Akua at Kamakahonu Page 294 r. '` ` 4 w p ) 3- r9 4PL4)kA MAY-p www.lunalilo.org Esteemed Greetings to the Trustees of the King Lunalilo Trust: I am humbly inspired to read each of your backgrounds conveyed by the Trust's website. We are told by good teachers of the world that history is made every day. I reach to you to reach to the heart of Alii King Lunalilo. I was guided by Akua to do so. Yours is one of three great trusts left by our Alii for the betterment of'Oiwi, the first people of the Pacific and Hawai'i. The materials enclosed in the pages of documents mailed to you tell a story. We have had a miracle at Kamakahonu. In 2010, I began hearing from the Ancestors of'Oiwi including our Great Kings and Queens. I reached to tell the members of the Hawaii State Legislature in a letter dated 3/ 3/ 21. I wrote letters to the Governor, the Mayors and county councils of every island to share this miraculous news. When my father created the Temple Drum for Ahu'ena Heiau, the Temple he loved and restored, I had a calling to travel to all schools and announce by voice and flyer the excitement that came from the first restoration of the ancient Temple and First Capital of Hawai'i. I carried this out as I shared how Pahuali'ikoaoka'awaloa is the first Temple Drum to be named in association with the first restored temple in Hawai'i, the Pacific and the world. Alii Lanakilakeikiahialii Na'ope guided the naming process. He told me to pray and ask Akua. I soon met as I served as a docent at Hulihe'e Palace, Sarah Malina Kailikea of Nawiliwili Kaua'i, 87 years young, who taught us that the name of the Temple Drums are given in honor of the land they grew upon. They are called Pahuali'i, the drum of the chiefs, and so now all may honor Ka'awaloa uka where the log came from. The life to Pahuali'ikoaoka'awaloa came by a naming ceremony conducted at Kamakahonu at the dawn of the millennium, 2000, by the Drum Maker, Dr. Kalena Silva of Ka Haka 'Ula o Ke'elikolani, myself and Coline Aiu Kumu Hula of Halau o Kumukahi and Halau Hula o Maiki, respectively. Page 295 Please review the email document I enclose entitled "The Reach to 'Oiwi on Earth is On." This tells of even greater news from the Ancestors who represent Most High God at Kamakahonu. By Akua, Hawai'i's Chosen King Alii Nui Mo`i Edmund K. Paki - Silva II and Hawai'i's Declared Queen Ka'I omana'ulaokalaniki'eki'eloakeahi'ena'enamauokalaulani, humbly, Ali'i of our time reach in greatest reverence, respect and honor to the heart of Ali'i King Lunalilo by communication in Spirit and with the esteemed Trustees of the King Lunalilo Trust. O ke 'Ano o ka Lahui i ka 'Ohana The character of the nation is seen in the family Olelo No'eau Restorer of Ahu'ena Heiau Ali'i David Keli'ihelemauna Roy, Jr. Ka'I omana'ulaokalaniki'eki'eloakeahi'ena'enamauokalaulani Lamaku Kahunanui Ahu'ena Heiau Kamakahonu, Hawai'i Kauoha Ka Mamaka o Ka Lama The Divine Order of the Steadfast&Worthy Two Who Uphold the Highest Light of Akua at Kamakahonu Page 296 From: Lamaku Mikahala Rov To: Cultural Resources Commission; King Paki-Silva Cc: Tanaka. Kim; Morrison,Bethany;Sullivan, Kevin Subject: Spiritual History in the Living Oral History by Ancestors of"Oiwi at Kamakahonu Date:Monday,July 10,2023 9:34:59 AM July 10, 2023 Oral History Spiritual Conveyance of Ancestors of 'Oiwi at Kamakahonu To: Members of the Hawaii County Cultural Commission From : Lamaku Mikahala Roy Ahu'ena Heiau, Kamakahonu Re: Pu'u o Kaluaokalani Oral Testimony re: Application of Kona 3 LLC Oral History Spiritual Conveyance of Ancestors of 'Oiwi at Kamakahonu Pu'u o Kaluaokalani means the "Repository of the Especially Sacred Lands of the Ages for Akua." Pu'u o Kaluaokalani is the identification of the utterly sacred beating heart of Life upon the Earth. Pu'u o Kaluaokalani encompasses 40 miles in Kona from Kaloko-Honokohau in the Page 297 north to HOnaunau in the south. Located within the expanse of this area is Ahu'ena Heiau meaning "Burning Altar" referring to the Great Light there). Ahu'ena Heiau is the first Temple built by 'Oiwi (mankind) upon the Earth. Man's reach to Akua was honored by the Divine Creator of Heaven and Earth. The Lana Nu'u Mamao stands forever reminding mankind that man and all of life were created by Akua (Divine Source of All Life). The Lana Nu'u Mamao (sacred Oracle Tower) stands upon Ahu'ena Heiau forever reminding man of the sacred relationship that exists between Akua (Divine Creator) and all of life created by Akua. The 40 miles are the base and perimeter of the true ORACLE upon the Earth which is Mauna a Wakea. The Lana Nu'u Mamao symbolizes Mauna a Wakea upon Ahu'ena Heiau. Akua created life in the Pacific in Kaluaokalani (meaning the Second Heaven and the First Name for Hawai'i) so very long ago. Ke-au-lama means "The Era of Light." In Keaulama, Akua intends to HEAL THE PLANET AND ALL LIFE UPON THE PLANET. The creation of Earth and life by Akua may not be quantified. Likewise, the Light, Hope, and Healing in Life by Akua in Keaulama, the Era of Light, may not be quantified. KEAULAMA is the re- birth of the Earth planet in Kaluaokalani . Page 298 KEAULAMA, The Era of Light, is Akua 's Gift to mankind and to all of life wherein Akua promises to HEAL THE PLANET AND ALL LIFE UPON THE PLANET BEGINNING IN HAWAII . Page 299 AT-7'j 1=r) (1 Ohl rl r)A111Tik'. Halau No'eau Kahelemauna House of Wisdom of the Mountain-Roaming-Chief Halau No'eau Kahelemauna is the location where `Oiwi (Pacific Natives) and all of mankind may learn of the Age of Light (Ke-au-lama) and be taught of Akua's (Divine Creator's) prescription for their healing. IN THE AGE OF LIGHT, AKUA PROMISES TO HEAL THE PLANET AND ALL LIFE UPON THE PLANET. By learning the cosmology of the first faith of`Oiwi in the Pacific, Divine Creator intends to heal the planet and all life upon the planet. Halau No'eau Kahelemauna will be the first and key location in Hawai'i to teach others from other world centers the way to derive and to learn healing by Akua. The vision unfolds by the restoration of the Garden named Mala'ai Pilihonua (Garden Beloved by the Earth) wherein all of the first plants of Kaluaokalani (the Second Heaven) and an ancient name for Hawai'i will be planted, loved and nurtured. The holoholona (animals) that dwell here will be loved and nurtured by humans for an outcome of lives in peace and harmony. This is the restored rhythm and vibration of Kaluaokalani. Lamaku Mikahala Roy Divine Conveyance May, 2018 Halau No'eau Kahelemauna Page 300 1 AHU'ENA HEIAU • KAMAKAHONU, HAWAII HAIAU NO'EAU KAHELEMAUNA HOUSE OF WUDOM OF THE MOUNTAIN-ROAMING CHIEF LAND ARCHIVE &OFFICE OF THE KAHU Aloha Kakou e ka'Ohana, In the mid 1970's Ahu'ena Heiau at Kamakahonu Hawaii was restored by'Oiwi. David Kahelemauna Roy, Jr. led that effort for Akua and became Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau by Akua and the people in the'Aha Kumu Pono at Kamakahonu. Ahu'ena Heiau is the first restored temple of worship in the Hawaiian Islands of the modern era. Kahuna La'au Lapa'au Morrnah N. Simeona said that the seventies were a time of great spiritual growth for Hawaii and her people. Among numerous efforts carried out meaningfully in the communities, Hokule'a traveled to Kahiki, Ho'oponopono was implemented in the Geneva Convention and taught to the world and Ahu'ena Heiau was restored in the Hawaiian Islands. This restoration of Ahu'ena Heiau (Burning Altar-- referring to the Great Light there)was guided by Akua in the hearts of the men who came from all islands with the main working crew coming from Kona. There was no Office of Hawaiian Affairs, no presence of a state historic preservation department only dedicated and faithful individuals with pride for the heritage of'Oiwi, pride in their bloodlines and respect for the First Capital of the Kingdom of Hawaii and all that came with it. In 2005, I succeeded my father as Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau. By loving communication with the Ancestors beginning for me in these past years, I'm instructed by them of the name our people have held for the station I inherit by Akua and my father. I am guided by Akua and by Ancestors who serve Akua Manamanaloa in the Pacific. I learn and teach the cosmology of the first faith of Hawaii, 'aina kulaiwi; ke'aina mauliauhonua. Mililani i Ke Akua, p,tid01.41..-kidatid Aft Lamaku Mikahala Roy, Kahu Ahu'ena Heiau Kamakahonu, Hawaii Page 301 May 23, 2015 Meeting of Mauna Kea `Ohana; HCC campus, Hilo Hawaii Comments of Lamaku Mikahala Roy, Kahu, Ahu'ena Heiau Kamakahonu, Hawaii Aloha mai kakou, I am Lamaku Mikahala Roy from Kona and I appreciate all the mana'o being brought forward today. I'm grateful for all gatherings to form and relate as Mauna Kea `Ohana. The Ancestors of`Oiwi are active and worldwide, people actively engage with Divine Realm. In 2010, the commemoration of the 200th anniversary of the unification of the Hawaiian Islands by Kamehameha the Great, Divine Conveyances from the Ancestors of`Oiwi began at Kamakahonu. On Mother's Day, 5-10-2015, a woman received a telepathic message from an `io, she reported, in Waikoloa. She saw in her mind's eye, the bird's features, colors and markings and was told where to look to find him. Driving along the highway, she soon did come upon the One who called her. He had passed on. This woman made a call that came to me. I went to prayer in the noon hour of that day. A powerful Divine Conveyance came forward. Please see attached. Here is what I'd like to share with you all today. Between the first&second meetings of the Mauna Kea `Ohana, this event and a most significant ceremony related to it took place. First, please read the attached full message. Then, I'd like to make emphasis by what is in my na'au today to share with you related to it. Here are my words of emphasis. Akua, in this Divine Conveyance, proclaims Mauna a Wakea to be the Holy Mountain of Creator and best representation of Kaluaokalani. Akua confirms in Hawaii, Spirit is honored by Akua's Firstborn, na Hiapo. As such, Akua still Guides in the care of the Hawaiian Islands. Akua proclaims a leader by genealogy and divinity, Alii Nui Mo'i Edmund K. Silva, Jr. and the support system formed with the people, Nou Ke Akua Ke Aupuni 0 Hawaii (For You, Akua, the Government of Hawaii). Safety comes by Life with Akua. In the desire for Safety and Protection of the Hawaiian Islands from further desecration of Lands and Spirit of`Oiwi, I hope that the 31 persons arrested and all who support Mauna a Wakea will agree that Guidance from the Source for Hawaii has been received. Let the Heavenly Lands be protected along with the people by Akua. Let transparent relating characterize the true and worthwhile efforts of aloha `aina and aloha ka po'e. E Ho'ola i ke Aupuni Pono'i — Revive the government rooted in the righteousness of Akua for the lands and the people. The Message of the Sacred, Royal Messenger in Waikoloa is: 0 ka pono ke hana 'ia A iho mai na lani Page 302 WINDS OF LOVE SWIRL SURROUNDING MAUNA KEA UPON THE EARTH EXTENDING OUTWARD TO THE MOST DISTANT REALMS OF SILENT AND RESOUNDING SPACE. GREAT WINDS CARRY THE LOVE OF DIVINE CREATOR FOR ALL CREATION FROM THE LARGEST TO THE SMALLEST MATTER. GREAT WINDS OF LOVE REMIND ALL LIFE WHERE YOU COME FROM — ON THIS DAY TO HONOR MOTHERS AND MOTHERHOOD — NOW RECALL AND HONOR THE CREATOR OF ALL LIFE. LET THIS DATE, 5 — 10—2015, REMIND US FOREVER OF `IO (10) THAT DELIVERS A MESSAGE AND CONFIRMATION. THE RESTORATION OF THE KINGDOM OF HAWAII IN THE COMPLETE HAWAIIAN ARCHIPELAGO OF ISLANDS IS IN PROCESS. MANKIND FORGETS THAT ALL OF CREATION BELONGS TO ME, YOUR DIVINE CREATOR. ONE OF MY FORMS ON EARTH IS THE `IO SEEN IN ITS HOME IN HAWAII. HOW IS IT THAT WORDS ARE EXPRESSED BUT THEN FORGOTTEN? Psalm 24: 1 "The Earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof; the world and they that dwell therein. For He has founded it upon the seas and established it upon the rivers." IN HAWAII, THE WORDS YET LIVE — SPIRIT IS HONORED BY MY FIRSTBORN, KNOWN AS HIAPO. KALUAOKALANI IS THE NAME THAT AMONG OTHER TRANSLATIONS MEANS "THE SECOND HEAVEN." IT IS THE LOVING FIRST HOME OF DIVINE WORLD AND HUMANKIND;THE FIRST HOME OF DIVINE BEINGS AND MAN. HERE LOVE WAS THE VIBRATION THAT PERMEATED AND MADE ALL LIVE IN HARMONY AND THRIVE. THE NAME OF THE LAND PERSISTED THROUGH PRESENT GENERATIONS AND IS NOW BEING REINVIGORATED. KALUAOKALANI IS PERHAPS BEST REPRESENTED BY HER TALLEST MOUNTAIN PEAK, YET SHE HAS NUMEROUS WONDROUS REPRESENTATIONS IN THE WATERFALLS, THE VALLEYS, THE RIVERS, THE SEAS. THE PEAK IS MAUNA A WAKEA; MY HOLY MOUNTAIN AND PLACE HELD IN GREATEST REVERENCE. LET THIS BE THE COMMEMORATION OF THE DAY HEAVENLY HAWK IN WAIKOLOA CONVEYED MY MESSAGE TO THE GREATEST AND THE SMALLEST OF MY CREATIONS IN THE PLACE I'VE PREPARED TO SERVE THE EARTH AND MANKIND. LET KALUAOKALANI AWAKEN ALL TO LOVE AND HARMONY. Page 303 THE RESTORATION OF THE KINGDOM OF HAWAII LED BY ALII NUI MO'I EDMUND K. SILVA, JR. AND NOU KE AKUA KE AUPUNI 0 HAWAII IS UNDERWAY. THE UNITY OF `OIWI OF THE PACIFIC IS HELD IN SPIRIT BY THEIR ANCESTORS WHO SERVE ME. FROM THE VERY FIRST KINGDOM ESTABLISHED AT KAMAKAHONU, MY HOLY LIGHT HAS SHINED THROUGHOUT ALL MOVEMENTS OF MAN. NOW BY THE READINESS OF ALL WORKERS FOR LIGHT AND WORKERS FOR MY HOLINESS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD DO I PROCLAIM MAUNA A WAKEA MY HOLY MOUNTAIN AND KO HAWAII PAE `AINA AS LANDS OF KALUAOKALANI NOW OCCUPIED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. NOU KE AKUA KE AUPUNI 0 HAWAII BY ALII NUI MO'I EDMUND K. SILVA, JR. IS ENFORCED TO RESTORE MY HOMELAND THE PACIFIC AND ALL OF MY CREATIONS FOR THE GOOD OF ALL LIFE AND TIME TO COME. HE `OIA'I'O NO. TRUTH INDEED. Received and Recorded on May 10, 2015 By Lamaku Mikahala Roy Lamaku Mikahala Roy, Kahu Ahu'ena Heiau Kamakahonu, Hawaii Page 304 f;°., 11,....... (. 41 4, illI)11Ni yr'r 1 kE6AglirlAltiAI `p From: Lamaku Mikahala Roy< Date: Sun,Jun 23, 2024 at 11:34 PM Subject: Question from Waiaka To: Ryan McCormack<Aolani Kailihou < Halau No'eau Kahelemauna House of Wisdom of the Mountain-Roaming Chief Pu'u o Kaluaokalani landline Aloha e Ryan me Aolani, Thank you for your patience. Mahalo nui loa mau for the wonderful day we shared together last week. Mahalo for our wonderful luncheon. Mahalo nui loa for the wonderful gift of Ke Kumu Aupuni. I am very grateful --beyond words -- for everything. The member in our group by the name of Waiaka, asked me a deep and insightful question. Please share the following answer with him. Also please share my email address with Waiaka and all the participants. I would love to hear from all of you at any time! Waiaka: So, since Kahunanui Hewahewa served Ka Mo'I Kamehameha Akahi, has much changed?" Lamaku: Kahunanui Hewahewa, kau i ka 'ihi (held in highest respect) departed Earth realm on February 16, 1837. Hohonu ka ninau. I ask for the answers from the ancestors &here they are: Ae, changes have been made on Earth as they are called for by Akua manamanaloa. Page 305 You may give Waiaka the example of the new Kauoha ofAkua in Ke Kauoha Ka Mamaka o Ka Lama at Kamakahonu. You see in this example how life on Earth at Ahu'ena Heiau changed by changes made by Akua. Kauoha Ka Mamaka o Ka Lama: BE IT KNOWN The Ancestors of'Oiwi teach all on Earth that Ahu'ena Heiau is the First Temple of Spiritual Worship built by mankind on the planet. Ahu'ena Heiau was built by the Firstborn of Akua, ka 'Oiwi. In 1975, Ahu'ena Heiau was restored by'Oiwi led by Ali'i &Kahu David Keli'ihelemauna Roy, Jr. --the Restorer of Ahu'ena Heiau. In gratitude to Akua, in commemoration of the great progress made for 'Oiwi and mankind by the restoration of Ahu'ena Heiau, the Aha'aina Kumu Pono (Gathering for True Foundations), the community feast, was held at Kamakahonu. The Kauoha Ka Mamaka o Ka Lama was declared following the passing of Ali'iwahine Verda Leialoha Vida-Roy. This Spiritual Order declares that based upon the Lives and Service of Alii David Keli'ihelemauna Roy, Jr. and Ali'iwahine Verda Leialoha Vida-Roy, from this time forward there are Two Positions of Responsibility to Akua for Ahu'ena Heiau; One for the Male or the Kahu and the Second, for the Female; Divine Servant of Akua and Helpmeet of the Kahu. This is now Spiritual Law at Kamakahonu in Hawai'i for the Earth. Ola ke Kauoha Ka Mamaka o Ka Lama which means: The Divine Order of the Two Steadfast Ones Who Uphold the Highest Light of Akua at Kamakahonu. This Law of Spirit Lives. Here is the guidance of Akua. The King is chosen as Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau. In equal responsibility as Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau is Lamaku and Kahunanui of Ahu'ena Heiau Mikahala Roy from now on to be known by her Royal Name of HRM Queen Ka 'I o- mana'ula-o-ka-lani-ki'eki'e-loa-ke-ahi-'ena-'ena-mau-o-ka-lau-lani by proclamation of the Ancestors of'Oiwi for Akua and the King Alii Nui Mo`i Edmund K. Paki - Silva, II, respectively. By order of Akua, Kamakahonu is upheld as the Restored Kingdom of Hawai'i by King Ali'i Nui Moi, Edmund K. Paki - Silva, II Kahu, Ahu'ena Heiau. Kamakahonu is the Restored Capital and First Capital of the Kingdom of Hawai'i by Ka Na'i Aupuni, King Kamehameha-the-Great the Conqueror of the Islands. Ahu'ena Heiau is now the Home and Anchor for the Life of the Restored Kingdom of Hawai'i by Hawai'i's King Alii Nui Mo`i Edmund K. Paki - Silva, II. Ahu'ena Heiau remains the Holy First Temple of service to all mankind including those individuals who wish to remain U.S. citizens. Here expresses a condition, provided by Akua, that will provide peace and continued service to mankind and all life on the planet. Page 306 He 'Oia'i'o No Truth Indeed May we share again soon. I look forward to speaking again and seeing you again on Wed. June 26, 2024. Waiwai Mau Ke Kumu Akua is Our Infinite Source Aloha Ke Akua HRM Ka'I-omana'ulaokalaniki'eki'eloakeahi'ena'enamauokalaulani Lamaku Kahunanui Ahu'ena Heiau Kamakahonu, Hawai'i Kauoha Ka Mamaka o Ka Lama The Divine Order of the Steadfast &Worthy Two Who Uphold the Highest Light of Akua at Kamakahonu Page 307 Im}ssss I 07 Keauluma F> 4 Keaukarna p 4 40 ii"rIII u ana R if n'v le: 1 11,li,tIt p,4'1'f 001 Foundation th 11-_ i I `. . # # ai )_fld i iII``'II , 1ri Z. L I 1 444 +t+ r dl±+l Keaularna Koorrinrn,, 4. It-6111PCIPelb fib 15ZrKeaularnaiN '` yt11- 6& 11tip '.),Kearatarna 1 , Iia hual i i koaokaawal Oa. Kt,ur,r.rrx Honorable Members of the Hawaii 31st Legislature 2021 Hawaii State Capitol 415 South Beretania Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 March 3, 2021 Welina i Ke Ola o Ka La e Na Lala o ka 'Aha 'Olelo Kau Kanawai: Greetings in the Life-Giving Warmth ofthe Sun to Members ofthe Hawaii State Legislature In the mid-1970's Ahu'ena Heiau at Kamakahonu was restored by 'Oiwi. Kahu David Keli'ihelemauna Roy, Jr. led that effort for Akua and became Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau by Akua and the people in the 'Aha Kumu Pono, the Gathering for True Foundations, at Kamakahonu. Ahu'ena Heiau is the first restored Temple of worship in the Hawaiian Islands, in the Pacific and in the world. The restoration of Ahu'ena Heiau (translated as Burning Altar referring to the Great Light there)was guided by Akua in the Kahu and in the hearts of the men who came from all islands with the main working crew coming from Kona. There was no Office of Hawaiian Affairs, no presence of a state historic preservation department, only dedicated and faithful individuals with pride for the heritage of'Oiwi, pride in their bloodlines and respect for the First Capital ofthe Kingdom of Hawai'i unified by Kamehameha- the-Great. I'm instructed by the Ancestors that all members of the steady crew that restored Ahu'ena Heiau are to be acknowledged as Ali'i. Kahuna La'au Lapa'au Morrnah N. Simeona said that the Seventies were a time of great spiritual growth for Hawaii and her First People. Among numerous efforts carried out meaningfully in the communities, Hokule'a traveled to Kahiki, Ho'oponopono was implemented at the Geneva Convention and taught to the world and Ahu'ena Heiau was restored in the Hawaiian Islands. Halau No`eau Kahelemauna• House-of-Wisdom-of-the-Mountain-Roaming-ChiefPage 308 In 2005, I succeeded my Father as Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau. By loving communication with the Ancestors of'Oiwi who uphold the Highest Light of Akua at Kamakahonu beginning for me in these past years, I'm instructed by them ofthe name our people have known over centuries for the Station I inherit by Akua and by my Father. I am Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau and I am Lamaku. I am guided by Akua and by Ancestors who serve Akua Manamanaloa in the Pacific. I learn and teach the cosmology of the first faith of Hawaii, ka 'Aina Kulaiwi; ka 'Aina Mauliauhonua Hawaii Homeland, Hawaii Land of the Established Families of the Land. For the sake of yourselves, your children and their children to come; for the sake of Beloved Heaven and Earth now coming together as one in Keaulama the Era of Light in Hawaii for the Earth, take the appropriate time you require to read and comprehend the WORDS OF LIGHT of the Ancestors of'Oiwi that follow. Receive these words. Prepare to open your hearts that you will hear the Voice of your Loving Source through these WORDS OF LIGHT. E'Imi Mau i ka Malu Mualoa o ke Akua, Seek Forever the First Peace ofDivine Creator Cisconetifkri51.441444Idett Lamaku Mikahala Roy Kahu Ahu'ena Heiau Kamakahonu, Hawai'i Page 309 I. Na Hua'Olelo i Ka Lama o Na Kupuna o 'Oiwi Kau i Ka 'Ihi Words of Light of the Most Revered Ancestors of'Oiwi Guidance from Akua for the planet is to take place from Mauna a Wakea in the New Age of Light in Keaulama (The Era of Light) We wish to impart Akua's plan to be shared with the members of Hawai'i's State Legislature in the peace of their forum that they may comprehend& convey the biggest view and understanding of Mauna a Wakea to the Governor of Hawaii, all other Representatives of the U.S. Government; the President of the U.S. and to all World Leaders. As Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau but also so importantly and historically for Hawaii and the planet-- as Lamaku, the station you inherit by Akua for Service to Akua, you are called by Akua to teach the cosmology of'Oiwi for'Oiwi and for all of mankind. You are a Divine Healer by Akua for Oiwi and for all of mankind, the planet and all life upon the planet. Akua calls upon you, Divine Servant of Ahu'ena Heiau at Kamakahonu to share Divine Messages for Good and Helpful benefit to 'Oiwi, all mankind, the planet and all life upon the planet. By prescription from Akua, your are asked to help Akua heal the planet and all life upon the planet for you teach of Ke-au-lama, the Age of Light, now dawned upon the planet beginning in Hawaii. We wish to convey to you Words of Light in the understanding of the history of the Heavens; the cosmology of'Oiwi that tells of the identity and sacred knowledge concerning the sacred components such as that identified in the west as the Black Hole. What is being revealed here is that by way of the conveyances of Akua through you Lamaku and Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau, a new way of understanding a look into the Heavens and the whole identity of the Heavens by Akua by the spirituality of'Oiwi is beckoning mankind upon the planet. Why Mauna a Wakea is indeed the sacred pinnacle for Hawaii and the planet will be told. Why no further telescopes are necessary here nor allowed here will be told. Akua has spoken by the voice of the Royal Messenger and Great One near Akua in the Heavens as to what is at hand by Akua now. The Age of Light heralds that which is the new beginning; a rebirth for the planet and all life upon the planet. It is the birth of the New Age of Light and Change of World Order. What arrives is the Era of Peace, Love and Harmony for all of mankind and the planet. The creation of the Earth--very old present planet--began in the Pacific. 'Oiwi are Akua's Firstborn of Races and 'Oiwi helped Akua lay the tracks for what became all faiths from the Divine Pacific Sea. Page 310 Akua, with the assistance and presence of the Divine Seven Identities honored as Kane, Ku, Lono, Kanaloa, Hina, Laka and Pelehonuamea, caused the progression oflife by Akua in the Pacific in the lands first known as Kaluaokalani translated as The Second Heaven. You, Lamaku o Hawaii and Kahu o Ahu'ena Heiau are asked to teach the cosmology of the First Faith of'Oiwi at Kamakahonu and upon the planet. As Mauna a Wakea is the utterly Divine Connection between the life of the Heavens and the life created by Divine Creator Akua Manamana of the Heavens, it is Sacred Domain. All mountaintops are the sacred domain in the same way for the good and blessings upon the planet and all life upon the planet. Oiwi are known as Firstborn of Akua. They are the only Ones of the Earth that have not forgotten that "The Earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof..." Psalms 24:1. Akua wishes to guide the planet and all life upon the planet back to full health and long and successful life. Life eternal upon the Earth is possible by the Most Divine Gift of Akua in Keaulama; known also as the Soul Light Era spoken of by Master Zhi Gang Sha of China; Great Divine Healer and founder of the Tao Academy and the Love, Peace, Harmony network upon the planet. Akua wishes to bring this Gift from Heaven's realms to all life of Earth's realms. The Light creates movement and ongoing healing upon the Earth. Akua wishes to begin this in the largest way for the New and Healing Planet in Hawai'i where life began upon the first and very Old planet so very long ago. This is to be known as the creation of the Kingdom of Akua or the Kingdom of God upon the Earth. Akua begins this by guidance from Mauna a Wakea Akua's Holy Mountain and pinnacle of Kaluaokalani, the Second Heaven in the Pacific. Divine Creator calls for the restoration of the Kingdom of Hawai'i already begun by Leader and Ruler identified and chosen by Akua,Ali'i Nui MO'1 Edmund K. Silva, Jr. Paki. The Governor of Hawai'i and all offices of note have been informed of these movements occurring in time. Page 311 II. M Hua'Olelo i Ka Lama o M Kupuna o 'Oiwi Kau i Ka 'Ihi Words of Light of the Most Revered Ancestors of'Oiwi Kaloko-Honokohau served as the northern boundary of lands of great sacredness to 'Oiwi and to all mankind. Kaloko on the north and Honaunau at the south enclosed the intensely sacred lands dedicated to Akua(Divine Creator). Within these lands were and are Ahu'ena Heiau in Kamakahonu. At Pu'u is the sacredness focused and identified as the heart of Kaluaokalani, translated as -- The Second Heaven. While Pu'u is identified as the heart of Kaluaokalani, truly, the mountain-to- shoreline trails of the north Kona coastline "hold" the true history of the "heart" of Kaluaokalani. Kaluaokalani is ALL of the Hawaiian Islands extending northward through the northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Kaluaokalani became the Kingdom ofHawai'i unified by Kamehameha-the-Great. These land points have always been honored especially for bordering the lands held as the sacred repository for all 'Oiwi from time immemorial. When Kamehameha-the-Great unified the Kingdom of Hawai'i by Akua Manamanaloa (Most High God), he was the Chosen King and Leader of his people by Akua. Akua blessed and provided for the success of his efforts for'Oiwi, his Beloved People. Kamehameha-the-Great unified the islands and took special care of the repository of the especially sacred lands of the ages. Kamehameha-the-Great comprehended that He was the representative of Most High Akua, Divine Creator, and sought to procure the hearts of his people in this belief. He ordered the conversion of the centuries-old beliefs held in the first faith of'Oiwi in the Pu'uhonua o ka and He and his forces stood in battles to defend these changes. A large battle took place at Kaloko-Honokohau where many lives were lost believing the way they were taught to believe; in the way of the faith they lived. The national park staff of Kaloko-Honokohau that desired a blessing of Akua upon all involved in a land-clearing episode in 2014 are to be honored for seeking this Goodness and Blessing of Akua. This Instance Was Chosen By Akua to be the focal point for the Great Light Dawning in Hawai'i for the Planet. Here is Keaulama— The Age of Light. At Kaloko begins the New Greatest-Story-Ever-Told. Where certain lands are chosen as the Capital of the Kingdom of Hawai'i, what does this tell us of the lands neighboring the Capital? Mea nui lakou. They are of Great Importance. Hohonu loa ka pilina o neia'aina i na 'Oiwi. Hohonu ka pilina o neia'aina la'a i na hoa kanaka a pau. To the first people of the Pacific these lands hold deep meaning in connectedness. To all mankind, these sacred lands hold deep meaning in connectedness. Ahu'ena Heiau is the first restored Heiau (Temple) of worship of'Oiwi. Ahu'ena Heiau is the first Temple built upon the Earth to give honor and give all praise and glory to the Source of Life Page 312 of'Oiwi. The Source of Life of'Oiwi is the Source of Life of all Mankind. 'Oiwi are the Firstborn of Akua; the first souls of the firmament created by Akua in Kaluaokalani in the Divine Pacific Sea. Akua names 'Oiwi as his Firstborn, Ka Hiapo, for they helped Akua lay the tracks for what became all faiths of the Earth. Ka Hiapo reflect the honor Akua bestowed upon 'Oiwi for the special help they provided to Akua in Kaluaokalani. Akua made a promise to 'Oiwi. It is the promise Akua keeps. The lands between Kaloko-Honokohau and Honaunau are SACRED AND VITAL LANDS OF AKUA for history to 'Oiwi and all mankind. These lands constitute the sacred heart of what became the remnant of the Great Continent of MU that flourished with great populations over time and sank over time. This history would not be known without the quality and presence of yourself, e Lamaku o Hawaii and Kahu of Ahu'ena Heiau -- as One of your Nation of'Oiwi o Kaluaokalani. This history would not be known without Akua Manamanaloa's Gift of these Words of Light by way of your Ancestors who uphold the Highest Light of Akua at Kamakahonu. AHU'ENA HEIAU IS THE FIRST RESTORED TEMPLE IN HAWAII AND WAS THE FIRST TEMPLE BUILT UPON THE EARTH. AHU'ENA HEIAU IS THE ONLY TEMPLE UPON THE EARTH RESTORED WITH THE LIFE OF THE SPIRIT OF MOST HIGH AKUA MANAMANALOA. AKUA CREATED THE EARTH WITHIN DIVINE PACIFIC SEAS. AKUA HAS BEGUN THE GREAT GIFT OF THE REBIRTH OF EARTH PLANET AGAIN IN THE DIVINE PACIFIC SEAS HERALDED BY THE HO'AILONA OF 'OMAKAOLAHOUKALUAOKALANI, OFTEN REFERRED TO AS FISSURE 8. UPON AHU'ENA HEIAU IS KA LANA NU'U MAMAO, THE GREAT ORACLE TOWER THAT REPRESENTS MAUNA A WAKEA; THE TALLEST MOUNTAIN PEAK OF THE EARTH MEASURED FROM THE BOTTOM OF OCEAN'S DEPTHS. WHAT IS THE ORACLE BUT THE SACRED CONNECTION POINT BETWEEN DIVINE AND MANKIND. HERE IS THE REPRESENTATION OF THE SACRED CONNECTION POINT BETWEEN DIVINE AND MANKIND IN MAUNA A WAKEA. UPON MAUNA A WAKEA, HERE IS THE ULTIMATE SACRED SPACE FOR THE LIFE OF THE PLANET AND ALL LIFE UPON THE PLANET. HERE IS THE ULTIMATE STAIRWAY OF LEVELS OF SACREDNESS CARED FOR BY SACRED APPOINTED ONES BY AKUA. THIS HAS BEEN THE PLACE TO HONOR AND GIVE THANKS TO AKUA FOR THE SACRED BALANCE BETWEEN AKUA AND AKUA'S CREATION OF PLANET EARTH. MANKIND OFFERS PROFUSE LOVE, RESPECT AND HONOR AND KEEPS THE FIRST PEACE CREATED BY AKUA. AKUA BLESSES ALL OF AKUA'S CREATIONS OF THE LIFE OF ALL THE REALMS OF EARTH AND BEYOND. Page 313 COUNT:1 -y G I:1' f-i - AWAI ' I- l'roclàmation kgiER&4.S, Verda Leialoha Vida Roy was born on April 26, 1928 in Honolulu, Hawaii, the daughter of Edythe A. Alden Vida and Earle K. Vida; and k$fER64.S, Verda Leialoha Vida Roy was born on the same birth day as her husband Kahu David Keli'ihelemauna Roy,Jr., the Restorer of Ahu'ena Heiau at Kamakahonu, Hawaii, in the Temple's historic restoration beginning in 1975; and 10WER£4S, Kamakahonu was designated the first Capital of Hawaii, and Ahu'ena Helau the personal Temple of Ka Moi Kalanipai'eakunuiakea Kamehameha the Great; and; iiiYfeR£4S, Verda Leialoha Vida Roy is honored in her lifetime as Ka Mamaka o Ka Lama, steadfast & worthy One of Two, who uphold the Flame-of-the-Highest-Light in the traditions of'Oiwi(native Pacific People)for the benefit of all 'Oiwi and all humanity;and k E?M., Verda Leialoha Vida Roy is the mother of four children, and as such is honored along with all mothers of Hawaii and the world, and VA R64$ Verda Leialoha Vida Roy is honored as Co-Founder, along with her husband Kahu Keli'ihelemauna Roy, Jr. of Halau No`eau Kahelemauna, the House of Wisdom of the Mountain-Roaming-Chief. Halau No`eau Kahelemauna is the First Home of Kamakahonu and the First Residence of the Capital of the Kingdom of Hawaii, unified by Ka Mei? KalanipaPeakunuiokea Kamehameha the Great in 1810, NOW, THEREFORE, I, HARRY KIM, Mayor of the County of Hawaii, do hereby proclaim September 13, 2018 as VERDA LEIALOHA VIDA ROY DAY in the County of Hawaii and call upon our community to cherish the memory of this most Treasured lady, who was a true ambassador of Aloha throughout her life. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused The Seal of the CountyofHawaiitobeaffixed. Done this 26" of October, 2018, in Hilo, Hawaii. l , , /' \\\ /,7 Harry Kimi.i,; Iii MAYOR s , A rw i.. /,: • Page 314 DeVera, Ashley From: Michael Alexander < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 11:06 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: General Plan Final Draft 2045 _ Michael Alexander Testimony Submission 26 September 2024 General Plan 2045 County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96772 Re: Written Testimony of Michael Alexander -General Plan Final Recommended Draft dated July 2024 Aloha Planning Department, In the last few days I have become aware that the County of Hawaii has produced a plan called the General Plan 2045. There are several things concerning this plan that bother me. The origin of this plan has nothing to do with Hawaii or the wellbeing of the people of Hawaii. It is my understanding the government is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people which was presented by Abraham Lincoln. It is my understanding the origin of this plan occurred in 1992 by Nancy Pelosi in conjunction with the United Nations (U.N.). This plan was formatted to change the World and United States as we currently know it. Within this plan there has not been any public debate or opportunity of the people of Hawaii to participate in their future. Additionally, the U.N. and Nancy Pelosi have nothing to do with the State or independent Nation of Hawaii. It appears to me this is formatted to control the people to illuminate their independence and self- determination. One of the principles that George Washington set forth was that the people of this country should be set forward over the concept of making money. It appears that you have reversed this—that money is more important than people. Therefore, there is no way I can support this General Plan 2045 as it is proposed. I VOTE NO FOR THIS GENERAL PLAN AS IT IS CURRENTLY PUT FORTH. It has been brought to my attention that Stand Together Hawaii has prepared a comprehensive basic review regarding the General Plan. I would suggest you go to their website and completely reorganize your 20-year General Plan. It has been proven over the years that we thrive when we are allowed to create for the well being of the people. Not for the wellbeing of corporate or government entities. Your plan has not restored one of the most important aspects of Hawaii that is being self-sustainable with a 100% agricultural system. Removing 400,000 acres of Agricultural land is the wrong direction. This island has the ability to feed itself healthy food. That is the most important direction to put in a plan for the future. Thank you for your consideration. It is my prayer that you move forward for the well-being of the people as we do not need Smart Cities or anything similar. iPage 315 Respectfully submitted, Michael Alexander 2Page 316 DeVera, Ashley From: Jasper Moore < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 11:47 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Objection to the General Plan 2045 Aloha to the Planning Director and the team behind the General Plan Consultation, Having seen the re-zoning that you folks are pushing forward without adequate 'agreement' from the residents of this island I am very concerned that you've overstepped your authority. These kinds of actions on your part(because they can lead to property appropriation) can be construed as being an 'accomplice' to fraud and or property theft. Which leads us all to another pretty obvious conclusion: that you haven't created this document to reflect the actual concerns of our island communities. That conclusion is further supported by all the woke 'garbage' jargon words. The word Stakeholder is used and we never see private property owner. (Why not?) Sustainability is mentioned over and over and yet no real 'plan' seems in place to support and build the economy. Plenty of costs are predicted for infrastructure though and 'private public partnerships' are mentioned many times. That is just a fancy way for you to describe the way you plan on creating a lot of debt and giving away valuable assets to corporations. This is definitely not a way to build up our economy. I really object to the whole Document as it is written with way too much emphasis on 'climate change.' I think that you all should stop suggesting that Carbon is 'causing' climate change without providing data showing this to be irrefutable fact. Over 1000 independent scientists have protested the Climate Change as myth and I believe that Climate Change is being used as an excuse to control people and appropriate public and private assets. The entire document appears to have been taking directives from Bill Gates and World Economic Forum and other 'un elected' bodies who are seeking dominance over national and local policies. The Office of Sustainability Carbon Equity and Resilience is providing a backdoor for these agencies to control our County laws and policies. It actually states in your plan that OSCER should direct the policies of 'all departments.' Why should we think that is a good thing? It doesn't even seem legal to place a single department above the legislature and the executive branch. The consultation itself has been terrible. I live in Hilo and no-one can explain why Hilo is not even in this plan. When it came time to invite comments in Hilo you all scheduled it when I was at work(2pm on a weekday). This is the credibility problem you have going forward. I don't think you should continue to present this document as if it comes from the community or is of benefit to us. Not too many people in the County know about this plan so far but there will be way more people upset about what you are promoting. Whomever is involved should probably think about resigning. I wanted to like this plan but I can't say anything good about it. and I don't consider that there are edits you can make to correct this at this point. Page 317 There has been a loss of public trust in the process you promoted as being a 'consultation.' I believe the entire document needs to be scrapped and the process begun again but this time taking into account the real concerns of our communities which are very different to the priorities written into this document. Yours Michael. J Moore Hilo 2Page 318 DeVera, Ashley From: Pasha < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 9:28 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: RE: General Plan Testimony Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the best future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or deleted. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more. How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language. We do not approve, consent, or agree with the General Plan. Without prejudice and with all rights reserved, Pasha Y. and Ohana Page 319 DeVera, Ashley From: noreply@konveio.email Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 4:20 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Konveio Inquiry] Pilikia for cultural traditions of fishing, hunting, traditional and cultural gathering rights. Robert Duerr (sent a message using the contact form at https://cohplanning.konveio.com/contact. As the Hamakua District 1 Commissioner for the Game Management Advisory Commission I am concerned that the Draft Hawaii County General Plan 2045 has not adequately provided for the needs, concerns or cultural traditions of fishing, hunting, traditional and cultural gathering rights. Protecting existing and establishing future access to ocean and lands for hunting, fishing, and gathering is absent in this plan. This pilikia needs to be addressed. 1Page 320 DeVera, Ashley From: noreply@konveio.email Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 4:29 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Konveio Inquiry] Hilo did not have a Community Development Plan Robert Duerr (sent a message using the contact form at https://cohplanning.konveio.com/contact. Hilo did not have a Community Development Plan I have a concern about the Draft Hawaii County General Plan 2045. I am concerned that Hilo did not have a Community Development Plan to contribute to the process. I am also concerned that residential shoreline in Paukaa is listed as natural and recreational land. It was urban low density. 1Page 321 DeVera, Ashley From: Susan Floyd < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 9:30 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Proposed General plan Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please have more opportunities for local people to give our input. This document was huge and took time to understand. We have many questions and look forward to your answers. In a spirit of honesty and cooperation. Mahalo nui, Susan Floyd Sent from my iPhone 1Page 322 DeVera, Ashley From: SHARON OLSON < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:36 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Last day testimony on GP health Attachments: Blank.pdf Sent from my iPhone 1Page 323 Sharon L Olson, DO September 26, 2024 Committee for the GP 2045 Honorable Committee: I am writing this in protest to the health section in the proposed 2045, General Plan. Thank you for the work that you have done to put this proposal together but it is far too vague to be called a future plan, especially when it comes to health. There are a couple of nice statements in the health and wellness section but there are no real statements of how the plan will achieve health and wellness in our citizens. Communities thrive when they have reliable access to essential resources such as quality and affordable housing, healthy foods, recreational areas, spaces for religious and cultural practices, medical care, living-wage jobs, safe neighborhoods, and educational opportunities." The plan does not address the universal trauma in Hawaiian citizens from the ongoing, illegal occupation by the US forcing Hawaiians to surrender their land to outside influences. People must be made aware that a trauma response may be procrastination and it could extend all the way to self harm. Currently, we don't have enough Therapists to deal with day-to-day problems that Hawaiians experience. Hopefully, with therapy for all, we could start to resolve the complacency and restore the Hawaiian warrior spirit. How does the general plan aim to integrate policies and actions that promote health and well- being in various elements? What exactly are the various elements and what policies are you planning to integrate for Health? I do not see a single plan for prevention of illness. Why are we not educating Hawaiians, that if they go out to eat, they are being poisoned? You might wonder how I can make such a bold statement. I am deathly allergic to MSG and almost 100% of the restaurants & Chefs use MSG in their foods. Often MSG is placed in the processed foods before the supplies reach the restaurant. FDA's rules state that MSG must be noted on labels. Unfortunately, the FDA does not follow its own laws and allows manufacturers to put hidden MSG in drugs, cosmetics and all packaged foods under more than 70 hidden code words. MSG is toxic to the brain and neurological system. Let's teach all Hawaiians how to read a label. So why not encourage all restaurants to stop routinely using MSG but offer it for those people who want it. Mostly we must educate people as to the long-term dangers and they probably will not want a flavor enhancer that poisons them. Glyphosate is another very toxic exposure. Repeated glyphosate exposures leads to high blood pressure, anxiety, sleep disturbance, family disruption problems, Alzheimer's and if you eat sugar also, the free glutamic acid will give you cancer. Round up, also known as glyphosate, causes cancer. This fact has been proven. Robert Kennedy, Jr, proved this fact in court, so Monzano sold to Bayer, so, it continues to be widely used especially on Big Island. I have tried to talk with politicians here in Hawaii but I think they've had a little too much exposure to glyphosate and MSG,since they seem to be brain dead already. Page 324 Even though glyphosate presents a tremendous health risk, the insurance industry in Hawaii will not pay for patients to have a glyphosate urine level tested. All of the diseases from pesticides and chemicals are profitable to western medicine so they don't like it when anyone challenges their for profit system. I, as well as most people, cannot digest gluten because the wheat molecule was changedand most people cannot digest this wheat so the person becomes allergic or intolerant. The new wheat causes G.I. distress and nutritional deficiencies, precipitating disease. Where is the public education informing citizens of these grave health concerns? GP mentioned that we need to recruit more physicians as well as other healthcare providers. We have a lot of physicians on the island but insurance will not pay them. I have been licensed in Hawaii since 1988 but about 10 years ago I received a phone call from the FCO at UHA. The FCO told me I was forbidden to help people, my job was to drug them according to the Insurance orders. I'm the doctor and I don't take orders from an insurance company to harm people for their profit! HMSA gave me a totally illegal contract to sign and I could not sign it. They wanted me to sign a contract that allowed them to take back every penny they ever paid to me even though the law says they are limited to two years.These are the largest Insurance providers in Hawaii and they effectively ran me out of business, but I live here. I'm not leaving! I have studied nutrition for 50 years. I came here to deliver babies at home, so the hospital slandered me. I have been delivering babies since 1970, and I have never lost a Mom but I have had two babies lost, due to prematurity. When the hospital slandered me the State of Hawaii allow them to hide the complaint for five years, when by law, I must be informed of the complaint within 48 hours. The entire complaint was fraudulent, made up by the hospital to put me out of business and to deprive me of any legal compensation. I watched as more than 40 physicians have been recruited, slandered and run out of this state. I suspect that was so they could collect on federal funds for underserved areas (I am requesting a full investigation into the insurance industry in Hawaii.) We do not have an underserved area, we have insurance companies that do not pay for appropriate care. The insurance will only pay the doctors who have been gagged and agreed to do as their told. These young physicians and providers seem not to know anything but legalized drug pushing. I don't think this is the Hawaiian way. There is no agency adequately supervising any insurance company in the islands because the agency that oversees them is run by the insurance companies. Until some action is taken against the insurance industry in Hawaii, the health of the citizen of Hawaii will continue to deteriorate because they are being lied to and drugged inappropriately and poisoned by their food. All patients should have the option of preventive care first. The only Hawaiian insurance that will pay for prevention is HMAA. How are you propose to get citizens in Hawaii healthy, without any preventive education, with toxicity in their food and the sprays on the land, toxic shots that have been revealed to be experimental, inappropriate medical care and zero preventative care? Health service assessment is not, 'what drugs can we give'. New infrastructure does not create health. Health and prevention should be first but it's not even offered. Let's make this general plan healthy for the people, the land and the water and as a result our food will be healthy. Page 325 I am happy to help and I want to help change what is being done to a new way of efficiently helping the Hawaiian people get well. Currently, I cannot afford even one person to help me because I run my medical office, in my home, and my farm completely by myself. What doctor does that? I do it out of my love for the Hawaiian people and this land. One of my favorite patients was Hank Fergerstrom but I believehe was murdered. Hank was well, even the oncologist said that his lung cancer would never kill him. Hank had a gallbladder attack and that comes from eating MSG! I had been treating Hank for a year and he was in excellent health and everyone saw the changes in his presentation. He ended up with a botched gallbladdersurgery leaking bile into his abdomen and that is incompatible with life because of the pain it creates. He had 11 surgeries (it should be investigated to see how much money the hospital and Doctors made) but they never corrected the problem. Hank was sent him home to die on hospice care. They effectively created the problem, never fixed it and then killed him. Why are these deaths never investigated? I believe all deaths of Hawaiians should be investigated because we must start preserving our Hawaiian people. We can't bring Hank back but we might start to stop the wrongful deaths. Let's really start talking about Health and Wellness and put it in the plan for 2045. The GP as proposed, fails to even identify the problems. Thank you for your attention to these serious matters. I pray that your eyes will be opened and that you will know that we must take immediate action or they will continue to kill Hawaiians one by one. They just haven't completed the takeover yet. Let's not let the GP 2045, be the plan that completes the takeover. Sharon Olson, DO Page 326 DeVera, Ashley From: Bloodhound < Sent: Friday, September 27, 2024 12: 16 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: The Communist UN Agenda 21 (now called Agenda 2030) plans for Hawaii - OBJECTION TO IMPLEMENTATION OBJECTION to its implementation. To whom this may concern, I very strongly object to the current plan to implement the UN's Agenda 2030 in HI, however, I support this revised plan. standtogetherhawaii.com/actionstandtogetherhawaii.com/action GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov I am an American citizen born in the USA. Thank you Robin Craig standtogetherhawaii.com/action 1Page 327 DeVera, Ashley From: E. Flores < Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 10:09 PM To:Planning General Plan; Planning Internet Mail Subject: Written Comments for Draft General Plan 2045 Attachments: Draft General Plan 2045 FCO Comments.pdf September 30, 2024 TO: County of Hawaii Planning Department GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov Planning@hawaiicounty.gov FR: E. Kalani Flores, representing the Flores-Case `Ohana RE: Written Comments for Draft General Plan 2045 Attached are comments for this draft plan. Page 328 September 30, 2024 TO: County of Hawaii Planning Department GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov Planning@hawaiicounty.gov FR: E. Kalani Flores, representing the Flores-Case `Ohana RE: Written Comments for Draft General Plan 2045 INTRODUCTION The Flores-Case `Ohana, a Native Hawaiian Organization as listed with the U.S. Department of the Interior, provides the following substantive comments in regards to the Hawai`i County Draft General Plan 2045. As a family who resides in Pu'ukapu, Waimea, it is hopeful that these comments from a Kanaka Maoli (aka Native Hawaiian) perspective will be included in the final plan. It is strongly suggested that the following be included in the tables of 2.3 Natural Beauty Sites: Site Tax Map Key Ahupua'a or Region Table 4: District of South Hilo View plane along Saddle Road Various Various Table 6: District of Hamakua View plane along Saddle Road Various Various View from summit of Mauna Kea Various Ka`ohe Table 7: District of North Kohala View plane along Akoni Pule Highway Various Various looking mauka and makai to replace: Coastline view plane from `Akoni-Pule Highway] View plane along Kohala Mountain Road Various Various looking mauka and makai to replace: Coastline view plane from Kohala Mountain Road] View of Mauna Kea Various Various Page 329 Table 8: District of South Kohala View plane along Saddle Road Various Various Pu`u of South Kohala Various Various to replace: Na Pu`u (Waimea), since a number of significant pu`u are missing from this list] View of Mauna Kea Various Various Pelekane Bay Area Kawaihae View plane along Akoni Pule Highway Various Various looking mauka and makai View plane along Kohala Mountain Road Various Various looking mauka and makai Upper Waipi`o Lookout 6-3-001:004 Waipi`o move to: Hamakua since Waipi`o is in this district] CONCLUDING COMMENTS Comments put forth are specific to the items presented and were not intended as an assessment of all aspects of this Draft General Plan as there was insufficient time and resources to do so. Flores-Case `Ohana Comments 2 Page 330 October 4th, 2024 To General Plan Manager and Staff, Many people were at the meeting in Puna on October 3rd, 2024. We all had many concerns about the general plan and it didn't seem like you took our concerns seriously since you said, This is the plan that will be going forward." We told you that this general plan looks like other general plans across the nation with words like: clustered housing, buffer zones, stakeholders, reduce vehicle mileage and more. You told us that this plan will not take away our freedoms, which leads me to believe you are not taking our concerns seriously and do not understand the magnitude of this plan. Here are some examples that are throughout this general plan: Pg. 116 Objective 19 Reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). This is a violation of the right to travel. Many County "incentives" have increased taxes in order to get the public to comply. That is extortion. Will that be a tactics in your quest to reduce travel? People have the right to travel without the overreach of government. Anything regarding Reduce travel" should be removed and in its place put, better public transportation like the rail line from Home Depot south that was abandoned. Page 41 (1.13) Incentivize private land management practices that protect and enhance natural resources and values and, when appropriate, pursue the acquisition of lands for the protection of natural resources. This says you'll increase fines, permits and other regulations that hinder people's right to privacy, property and the right to pursue happiness since you'll be taking people's money! Acquisition of land says that you will be taking people's private property. This again, goes against the Constitution. How can you not see this?! See also page 171, 35.a, & 35.k, page 215, 3. Page 236 8d. You may be thinking I'm looking too much into this. Then, add to those places, "without increased fines, regulation or permits and without taking people's private property without their permission". Page 33 the diagram reads: "Regulatory Measures": County Code, Administrative Rules, Permits. This shows that this general plan will increase restrictions and fees on farmers and other locals. This is not Pono. The plan should reflect innovation not constraints against the population. It should be changed to "Innovation Practices": Implement new resources, Administration support, Economic Alternatives Remove "permits". Stop trying to permit the population to death! Page 43. The word "cluster" is very concerning. You have many areas where you'll encourage" and "incentivize" clustered homes. See: "1.m Review the Code and Page 331 consider amendments to encourage site clustering of development in order to avoid critical environmental areas and assets." This is also on page 88, 13.15, page 98, 14.4, page 101, 15.6, page 130, 25.5. Page 232, 1.m. Also, on page 98 you want to amend the zone to establish "Clustered Rural Subdivision". Clustered homes are NOT how Big Island residents want to live. Are you "encouragements and incentives" going to be in the form of more regulations and taxes to get people to do what you want? You don't think this takes away people's freedoms? Buffer Zone" concern. You have this defined as, "Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone BRBZ) is enacted either separately or as an overlay district for the Volcano area, to guide development within the region's native forest through regulatory measures and economic incentives." These last phrases says more fines, permits and code. Economic incentives" also says fines or even an increase in taxes. This is NOT pono! See also page 101, 15i, page 232, 1h, page 233, 10, page 238, 15i. This is very concerning! Conservation" page 236, 10a is very concerning. This says that you'll amend zoning codes to keep people out of nature. This is not pono with the people on Big Island! Page 241, 26i, says clearly that you'll "incentivize" through reducing taxes to make people do what you want. That is EXTORTION! Stakeholder" is written 26 times and "homeowner" is written ZERO! The definition of Stakeholder: Stakeholders can include a wide range of entities, such as employees, customers, suppliers, investors, government agencies, community members, and non-governmental organizations. It does not say homeowner, farmer or local resident. Yet, we are to believe that we are included in this definition of "entities". That is simply not true! This general plan is a huge concern for many residents. The language in the general plan is also written in many, if not most, general plans across the nation so how was this plan written specifically for the Big Island? You have climate change as a factor for many things in this general plan, yet have you researched it? The climate change areas in this plan will further relinquish the rights of people on Big Island. 1952 credentialed scientists have signed a world declaration stating: There is NO climate danger! You can find it at Clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/ or simply put, "World Climate Declaration" into any URL. Climate change is a false narrative that the investors in renewable energy need people to believe in order for their investments to be profitable. Please do your research! Page 332 The declaration states: To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. This is precisely the problem of today's climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. Should not we free ourselves from the naive belief in immature climate models? Lastly, Rosa Kori, who was a 30 year District branch manager for the California department of transportation, and a litigation and eminent domain specialist, found the United Nations agenda 2021 which included all of the above terminally. She went throughout the nation speaking to County and City Council members warning that this plan would not only take away freedoms but inventory and control all land, animals, property rights and more! This is not a conspiracy. This is fact! Please watch this video to better understand https://TinyUrl.com/RosaKori Be brave and tell the County Council that this plan needs to be revised extensively. If you put this through, you'll be harming your family, and your keiki's future. This plan is not going to sustain the Big Island. It will destroy it! Concerned Big Island Resident, Michelle Melendez- PS I am not a conspiracy theorist. I have spent years studying what is going on through experts in meteorology, climatology, geology, and other sciences, as well as government areas. What I have written is the truth. If you ignore it, you condemn the people of this island to communism. Don't you owe it to your children to look deeper? 4-1-1 ob s G z ernes J Page 333 DeVera, Ashley From: AJ < Sent: Sunday, October 6, 2024 4:26 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: General plan Why is there a general plan ? What we need is anything peaceful and Spontaneous Order ! Governing is simply not nee ded ! A,J Page 334 DeVera, Ashley From: Donald < Sent: Sunday, October 6, 2024 4: 16 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise or Redo the Hawaii General Plan! Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? Much Mahalo Donald Noguchi 1Page 335 DeVera, Ashley From: Deborah Sevy < Sent: Sunday, October 6, 2024 7:33 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Hawaii County General Plan To whom it may concern, I am concerned about the many vagueness's of the big Island's general plan. Particularly what it says about private land, stakeholders and rights to take this land for what the county considers best use.Who even knows what this actually means. It sounds like if the county should so decide it can take anyone's land away. Please note that I am against a plan that can take our land and God given, constitutional rights away. Aloha, Deborah Sevy 1Page 336 DeVera, Ashley From: Juhl Rayne < Sent: Sunday, October 6, 2024 7:43 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Redo the general plan Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? mahalo juhl Rayne 0 M „°' Virus-free.www.avg.com 1Page 337 DeVera, Ashley From: Leslee Cook < Sent: Sunday, October 6, 2024 8:42 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Please revise the Hawaii General Plan( GP) I live in Kona and I'm representing 70 friends and family that are so very disappointed in this strange GP. We have put a lot of time into looking over this GP and have made some wording suggestions (in blue) that need to be changed in order to support us the community I have outlined clearly put in red the sentences that need to be removed. If this can't be revised then let's throw it out and start again, this time with members of the community invite to play a part in the wording and intention of this 2045 General Plan (we still have plenty of time to start all over again in drafting something that works with the citizens on this island). Below are our helpful suggestion if you want to keep this GP. On page 27 Please change to the following: Provide framework that supports local farmers and communities without further regulations, capital improvement priorities, and other pertinent local and government programs within the County organization and coordinate with State and Federal programs to support thriving communities. On Page 28 please add the blue sentences 1: 1 The Purposes of the General Plan ate to : Provide the framework that supports local farmers and communities without further regulations, capital improvements priories and other pertinent local and governmental programs within the County organization and coordinate with State and Federal programs to support thrwl: communities. Also on page 28 Please change to: The 2045 General Plan is the primary policy document for county agencies, planning commissions, elected officials, landowners, homeowners, developers, and locals to guide land use policy decisions for the Island of Hawaii. We would suggest that you add that which is in blue font and remove that in which is printed in yellow Please add: (a) The general plan shall contain a statement of development objectives, standards and principles with respect to the most desirable use of land within the county for residential, recreational, agricultural, commercial, industrial and other purposes which shall be consistent with proper conservation of natural resources without violating personal rights and freedoms, and supporting local communities to prosper, and the preservation of our natural beauty and historical sites, while still giving access to the public; the most desirable density of population in the several parts of the county (Remove) The GP states • "Promote and safeguard the public interest and the interest of the County as a whole." Please change to the following: ""Promote and safeguard the public interest and the interest of the County as a whole without violating personal freedoms, the Constitution or further regulating the public." Page 338 Effect political and technical coordination in community improvement and development." b) The council shall enact zoning, subdivision, and such other ordinances which shall contain the necessary provisions to support thriving communities, farmers and homeowners. The way it is written describes zoning people out of their homes with more regulations and fines. Page 29: d) Amendments to the general plan may be initiated by the council or the planning director giving adequate notice to the public for needed testimony. Now on page 32 We're concerned that you are politicizing our communities this is not the Hawaiian style it is not necessary on this island. Please change to: "Effect strategies that support community improvements and development for locals." We the community deserve to know who these "stake holders are" that needs to be clearly explained. Very dubious! We are very puzzled and think it Iso very strange that the GP has left out any wording about homeowners? I'm sure that was a mistake so please look at these mistakes or over looks and revise this plan with our suggestions. Please remove in all print in and add what is highlighted in 1.4 nnovation Principles and Practices Here is our big concern Big Island needs to move toward free energy, which is available and NOT MORE REGULATIONS ON WHAT WE HAVE. Change: Integrating innovation into the General Plan is crucial for fostering long-term resilience and thriving communities. Change: "This includes increasing the effectiveness of new technologies to support local communities, improving coordination among various agencies and levels of government, and finding new and innovative ways to support our natural and cultural resources. for better development that supports a thriving environment, economic alternatives (sharing without taxes, trading without regulation). and flourishing communities. The General Plan recognizes this need and aligns with the Hawaii 2050 Sustainability Plan,, which sets a strategic framework for achieving a sustainable future. By embedding sustainability principles into its core, this Plan sets forth a cohesive and forward- thinking strategy that addresses key challenges and anticipates future needs." Please remove what is YELLOW! Please change the last paragraph to read Work with local communities to pursue the vision, goals, and objectives. Find fair and supportive directions to define boundaries, development parameters, and measures intended to implement goals or objectives. Three actions in the Plan include: 1. 2Page 339 o • General Plan Land Use Map: A map that graphically delineates the areas of intended future land use types that support thriving communities and environmental support and do not hinder personal freedoms. o • Policy: A general rule for action focused on a specific issue, derived from more general goals3that also support thriving communities and supporting the environment. Standard: A supportive measure that defines the meaning, quality, or quantity of a policy by providing a way to measure its attainment. 1. In the General Plan, future land use maps, policies, and standards are specific to the actions through which zoning ordinances, subdivisions, and public improvements or projects are initiated or adopted through innovations and are flexible to support thriving communities. "because, as they must conform to and implement the general plan in accordance with the County Charter, Section 3-15. Remove! The word "conform" is concerning. We are not in Communist China. I'm sure this was a mistake by your editor. Please revise to "support thriving communities" These above are necessary changes if this General Plan is to succeed, as you can see we have helped you achieve your goals of helping the people that you swore to protect and serve with this more inclusive and supportive language. Isn't that what you swore on your heart to support? I hope you are happy and delighted with our wording suggestions. Mahalo nui loa, Leslee Cook and many other tax paying citizens here on Big Island 3Page 340 DeVera, Ashley From: Lahilahi Heen < Sent: Sunday, October 6, 2024 5: 11 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise/Redo the Hawaii Gen Plan Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. To be very blunt, the wordiness of your current Plan sounds like a cover for a Smart City, which for people with their brain power left, have NO INTEREST in. The dialog in the current Plan is a communist tactic. SMART, surveil monitor analyze record track. A small prison like space that will be lit with cybercrime. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? How about your Plan include REDUCING Government. Much Mahalo, Ms Heen Page 341 DeVera, Ashley From: Jon McGee < Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 4:31 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise or Redo the Hawaii General Plan! Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? Much Mahalo JC McGee Page 342 DeVera, Ashley From: Mikkel Rev < Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 2:15 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Regarding Hawaii General Plan Dear Aloha Planning Department, I submit my comments for the final draft of the Big Island general plan. My comments fall into two categories. Unfortunately, (1) it doesn't appear to support the future of Big Island. (2) It doesn't clearly state what you want to do. First, it doesn't support Big Island because I cant see that it provides anything that I would characterize as 'positive' of'desirable'. On the contrary, it supplies much of the unwanted. Namely disrupting domestic peace, limits freedom, further curtails travel and clusters people. At a phenological level, it will kill thousands which we can't do (and which you know the punishment for). Second, it doesn't clearly limit your powers by stating what you want to do. We can't give you a pass on doing whatever you want' as long as you use friendly words and promise to be 'kind and lovely'. It appears that everyone I know will remember for fifty years what your colleagues did during the fake pandemic when the central planners conspired and incentivized to kill families like your own across the Island using unlimited powers. Had they written in a plan ahead of time explicitly stating 'what the political goals were with a plandemic', do you think we would have listened to them then? The same applies here. Should your central planners be brave enough to say what this plan does for the Island, their plan wouldn't even have made it to disturb me at my desk. So, let it be homework to ask the central planners how"Sustainability" merges with their goals for a "Great Reset", New world order" and "Great taking"and put that in every future plan. You better include details regarding the mass- extermination itself, otherwise I will keep on rejecting it again and again. Only when it is completely honest can we consider if this is something positive for the island. Please let me know in case you need any more information to prevent killing thousands. Regards Dr. Mikkel Rev, Ph.D. Page 343 DeVera, Ashley From: Umberto Taormina < Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 1:04 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise or Redo the Hawaii General Plan! Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? Much Mahalo Umberto Taormina III Page 344 DeVera, Ashley From: Rebecca Melendez < Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 4:22 PM To:Planning Internet Mail; Roy, Alex; Villegas, Rebecca; Kimball, Heather; Kagiwada, Jennifer; Lee Loy, Sue; Kierkiewicz, Ashley; Kanealii-Kleinfelder, Matt; Galimba, Michelle M.; Inaba, Holeka; Evans, Cynthia F.W.; repaiu@capitol.hawaii.gov; repalcos@capitol.hawaii.gov; repamato@capitol.hawaii.gov; repbelatti@capitol.hawaii.gov; repchun@capitol.hawaii.gov; repcochran@capitol.hawaii.gov; repevslin@capitol.hawaii.gov; repganaden@capitol.hawaii.gov; repgarcia@capitol.hawaii.gov; repgarrett@capitol.hawaii.gov; repgates@capitol.hawaii.gov; rephashem@capitol.hawaii.gov; repholt@capitol.hawaii.gov; rephusseyburdick@capitol.hawaii.gov; repichiyama@capitol.hawaii.gov; repilagan@capitol.hawaii.gov; repkahaloa@capitol.hawaii.gov; repkapela@capitol.hawaii.gov; repkila@capitol.hawaii.gov; repkitagawa@capitol.hawaii.gov; repkobayashi@capitol.hawaii.gov; repkong@capitol.hawaii.gov; replachica@capitol.hawaii.gov; replamosao@capitol.hawaii.gov; replowen@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmarten@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmartinez@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmatayoshi@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmatsumoto@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmiyake@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmmizuno@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmorikawa@capitol.hawaii.gov; repnakamura@capitol.hawaii.gov; repnakashima@capitol.hawaii.gov; repnishimoto@capitol.hawaii.gov; reponishi@capitol.hawaii.gov; repperruso@capitol.hawaii.gov; reppierick@capitol.hawaii.gov; reppoepoe@capitol.hawaii.gov; repquinlan@capitol.hawaii.gov; repsaiki@capitol.hawaii.gov; repsayama@capitol.hawaii.gov; repsouza@capitol.hawaii.gov; reptakayama@capitol.hawaii.gov; reptakenouchi@capitol.hawaii.gov; reptam@capitol.hawaii.gov; reptarnas@capitol.hawaii.gov; reptodd@capitol.hawaii.gov; repward@capitol.hawaii.gov; repwoodson@capitol.hawaii.gov; repyamashita@capitol.hawaii.gov Subject: This General Plan CAN take property away from the community To Whom it May Concern, The state has the right to take property under Eminent domain and In the General Plan on page iii it states, 17.4 "Land use applications shall identify as early as possible any existing or potential active living corridors that should be incorporated into the County's open space network." If this plan goes through and you fill out a Land USE application to build or get a permit on your property, you WILL have to identify if your property has an "existing or POTENTIAL active living corridors that SHOULD BE INCORPORPORATED INTO THE COUNTY'S OPEN SPACE NETWORK." So, land that the county"SHOULD" TAKE BUT THEY ARE USING THE WORDS INCORPORPORATED INTO THE COUNTY'S OPEN SPACE NETWORK." 1Page 345 This is WRONG and can allow the county to take property away that used to be protected under the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Page 41 1.13 it reads 1.13 "Incentivize private land management practices that protect and enhance natural resources and values without further regulations or fines. and, when appropriate, pursue the acquisition of lands for the protection of natural resources." This does NOT give any information on the type of lands, such as For Sale lands. This needs to be revised because this is too close to just giving Hawai'i Planning the right to take "lands for the protection of natural resources." Page 81 ii.d Amend the Zoning Code to allow for PUD to become administrative permits and subject to the approval of the Planning Director. This is allowing the Planning Director to deal with permits. This Planning Director has proven himself untrustworthy as this article shows shady deals https://www.environment- hawaii.org/?p=13213&fbclid=IwY2xj awFywSNleHRuA2F1bQIxMQABHQ19iWP1- KbAxh1McGg8QMdmz7TlQdNOflnOTKp2xMOazMSuUhFAJY4u6Q aem 8tkpV5DyPTe- erkFjpt7OQ To continue to give this man more power is not safe for the Big Island. Final decisions need to stay with the county council and not be given to this Director or any other Director. We need to stay with checks and balances. Page 85 Lands to be kept in a largely natural state with minimal facilities consistent with open space uses along with agricultural land uses. Includes areas vulnerable to natural hazards, steep slopes, lava fields, and areas set aside for cultural and/or natural resource preservation purposes that are not necessarily under active management. Dwelling density on agriculture zoning up to 1 unit per acre. Whose lands are they talking about when they say"agricultural land" that they want to keep "in a largely natural state with minimal facilities consistent with open space..."? And"Dwelling density on agriculture zoning up to 1 unit per acre" what is 1 unit per acre? This is trying to say what people can do on their agriculture zoned land and this is NOT RIGHT. Page 85 Lands that are not capable of producing sustained, high agricultural yields without the intensive application of modern farming methods and technologies due to certain physical constraints such as soil composition, slope, tillable by machine, and climate. These lands are better suited for other less intensive agricultural uses such as grazing and pasture and can support additional residential densities when situated near UGAs. Dwelling density up to 1 unit per acre, although additional may be allow with permitted additional farm dwellings. Does this paragraph mean Hawai'i Planning can tell farmers what their "lands are better suited for"? This needs to be revised to be extremely clear. Page 112 2Page 346 Mountain For all zone districts As determined by the director to provide reasonable means to access public trail sections and public facilities Again they are trying to give more power to the Planning Director and this is not safe or okay for Big Island's community. Please, they need to revise this General Plan and NOT be allowed to be given the right to take properties away and NOT have the Director be given more power. Also, this General Plan states a lot about making plans to make plans. Does this mean if this Plan goes through, whatever plan they said they would make would go through without all of us seeing what it is? Please, look at the wording in this General Plan because I feel it is trying to have the right to take community property for its Open Space Network, and trying to tell people what they can do with their agricultural lands, as well as give more power to the Hawai'i Planning Director, when he is clearly for developments that are not for the community but for tourists. There are now 501 signatures that want approving development to stop because there are years of developments that have already been approved for the future and Big Island's Resources and Infrastructure needs to be addressed before even more future developments are approved. Please, see this petition that is asking for Island issues to be taken seriously Help Big Island Resources and Infrastructure Stay Safe For ALL Who Live Here and Visit https://www.change.org/p/help-big-island- resources-and-infrastructure-stay-safe-for-all-who-live-here-and-visit Does this General Plan seriously address Big Island Resources and Infrastructures? Because these issues need to be addressed ASAP and should be the first thing in this General Plan. How are they going to deal with the water issues that we are having, needing a new landfill on island, cesspool issues, power issues... This petition has ideas on how to address these issues, and I hope Hawaii Planning will look at them and start putting Island Resource and Infrastructure before approving more developments for the safety of all who live here https://www.change.org/p/help-big-island-resources-and-infrastructure-stay-safe-for-all- who-live-here-and-visit Thank you, Rebecca Melendez 3Page 347 Petition for Hawaii County General Plan 2045 LL 1. My name is 614 I do not consent to this general plan 2. The plan as it is decreases personal property rights as guaranteed by the Constitution and increases those ofthe state and'STAKEHOLDERS' without due process. I do not consent. 3. Numerous points of the plan violate constitutionally guaranteed rights and I reject them as illegal and unlawful 4. The general plan must uphold the spirit and the letter ofthe law ofthe Constitution For the united States of American and the Bill of Rights and that of Hawaii; infringement on those rights violates the oaths of office of those entrusted to guard guard and protect those rights. 5. I will only agree to a plan and to language that represent the values and concerns ofthe people of this island. I do not consent to any Global imperatives. 6. In addition the illegal occupation of the Kingdom of Hawaii, the United States of America continues to abrogate the international laws of occupation and the rights of Hawaiian nationals and their claims to the land. This plan adds further insult to injury to my Hawaiian friends. 7. This document is labeled'final draft'and it has been stated that it will go as it is to the County Council, this means that our testimony, thought politely acknowledged has no influence on the final product. Though available since July in its current form, all testimony in the last 3 months likewise has not had opportunity to impact the final document. The public review period must be • • . • , a ur valid and significant concerns addressed; anything less cannot be o :er than s:an ctured consent and a breach of the public trust. I do not consent. to If you agree with t ese tat- s please sign Belo . NAME: DOMICILE —Where do you live? Page 348 DATE: 10/9 PEPEEKEO COMMUNITY CENTER FINAL PUBLIC CONSULTATION RE: GENERAL PLAN 2045 TO: NAMED COUNTY OFFICIAL FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, COUNTY OF HAWAII : April Supranent, DIRECTOR LONG RANGE PLANNING ALOHA . You are being provided a copy of an affidavit giving sworn testimony to an incident which suggests that deceptive practices have been associated with the creation of The General Plan 2045. These deceptions alleged here are consistent with testimony you have received from the public previously. These deceptions if proven true, also involve breaches of the law so you are being advised of the legal liability to you personally and to Department of Planning if this General Plan Document continues to be recommended by you or in your capacity as an employee of The Department of Planning. You have been hereby advised that on the basis of serious `breech of public trust' by County Officials associated with the General Plan 2045, it is your obligation to immediately close down this hearing and to suspend this process. Page 349 1. Introduction We submit this joint affidavit to address breaches of public trust by Hawaii County Officials,specifically you,Ms. Frecia Cevallos,Deputy Director of Research and Development,and Mayor Mitch Roth,concerning the publication and promotion of the Final Draft of the General Plan 2045.These officials have violated public trust by concealing critical information and misleading the public regarding their involvement with international partnerships promoting "SMART Cities." 2. Factual Background A. Public Meeting of August 24,2023 On August 24,2023,during a public briefing led by Mayor Mitch Roth,a member of the public inquired about the county's stance on "SMART Cities." Mayor Roth responded that he did not know what a SMART City was and deferred the question to you,Ms. Cevallos,who also denied any knowledge of SMART Cities. B. Announcement of ICLEI Partnership On August 26,2023,just two days after the public meeting,the Office of the Mayor • released a press statement announcing a partnership with ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives)and the initiation of a sister city relationship between Hilo and Fortaleza,Brazil. ICLEI is internationally recognized for its role in planning and implementing SMART City initiatives. C.Cities Forward Program On September 26,2023,you attended a "Kick Off" meeting for the Cities Forward program.At this meeting,you were paired with Luciana Loro,Secretary of Planning and Environment of Fortaleza,Brazil. Fortaleza is in proximity to a developing SMART City, as documented by the Planet Smart City initiative,which has partnered with ICLEI. Despite these connections,neither Mayor Roth nor you disclosed these developments at the August 24th public meeting. 3. Legal Breaches A. Violation of Public Trust(Hawaii County Charter,Section 13-10) The Hawaii County Charter requires that public officers and employees conduct themselves in a manner that maintains the public's trust.The failure to disclose critical information regarding the county's involvement with ICLEI and the SMART City initiative constitutes a breach of public trust,as it denied the community the ability to engage in a transparent and informed consultation process for the General Plan 2045. B. Breach of Sunshine Law(HRS §92-1 et seq.) The Hawaii Revised Statutes require that government actions be conducted in an open and transparent manner.The failure to disclose the ICLEI partnership and the timing of meetings that limited public participation violates Hawaii's Sunshine Law,which ensures public access to government processes and decision-making.The failure to make information public,as articulated in the Sunshine Law, implies that if the partnership or planning initiatives were already underway and not properly disclosed to the public before or during the meeting,it could be grounds for a breach of transparency obligations. C.Deceptive Practices in Government Planning(HRS §91- 7) Under Hawaii Revised Statutes,it is unlawful for public officials to engage in deceptive practices during public consultations or planning processes.The denial of knowledge regarding SMART Cities during the public meeting,followed closely by the Page 350 announcement of a partnership with ICLEI,indicates,deceptive practices intended to mislead the public about the true nature of ongoing international collaborations. 4. Demand for Action Given the aforementioned facts,we hereby demand the immediate suspension of the review process for the General Plan 2045. Furthermore,we call for a full investigation into: o The financial transactions and contracts associated with the ICLEI partnership. o Communications and memorandums exchanged between Hawaii County officials, ICLEI,and the parties involved in the sister city agreement with Fortaleza,Brazil. 5. Failure to address these breaches of public trust and the continuation of the review process for the General Plan 2045 will result in further violations,actionable under Hawaii law. 6. Exhibits Attached are the following exhibits supporting the claims made in this affidavit: o Exhibit 1: Screenshot from video featuring Mayor Roth in Town Hall appearance in Volcano 8/23/ 23 o Exhibit 1 Press Release for the announcement of the ICLEI "Cities Forward" Program 2 days later on 8/26/23 o Exhibit 2: Image of Ms.Cevallos in attendance at the "Kick Off" meeting for'the Cities Forward Program. o Exhibit 3: Website of ICLEI showing a SMART City initiative dating 2022-2023. o Exhibit 4: Screenshot from a video posted on the Hawaii County Research and Development website showing Ms.Cevallos attending the ICLEI "Cities Forward Brazil" conference in Sao Paulo,Brazil,on June 17,2024. In this video,Ms. Cevallos is seen announcing joint projects between Hawaii and Fortaleza,Brazil, with Planning mentor Luciana Loro. o Exhibit 5: Screenshot from the Planet Smart City website showing an image of the new SMART City being constructed near Fortaleza,Brazil,Hilo's "sister city." 7. We conclude that the sequence of events,specifically the two-day period between the public denial of knowledge about SMART Cities and the announcement of the ICLEI partnership,demonstrates a deliberate deception of the public.We believe that certain portions of the Hawaii County General Plan describe zoning and development conditions necessary for the installation of clustered housing in the form of SMART Cities.This, along with the failure to disclose.the ICLEI contract and the global partnerships Hawaii County has entered into,demands a thorough investigation into all related financial transactions,contracts,communications,and memorandums from all parties involved with ICLEI. 8. Opportunity for Your Response In light of the serious allegations contained within this affidavit,we hereby extend an invitation for you to respond to any inaccuracies or misrepresentations of fact that may be presented herein. It is imperative to ensure that all parties have the opportunity to clarify their positions,especially concerning matters that suggest potential breaches of law.Therefore,we request that you provide Page 351 your response within a reasonable timeframe,facilitating transparency and accountability in this process. 9. Conclusion We, (Names of Signatories],swear that the information provided in this affidavit is true and correct to the best of our knowledge and belief. Signatures of Affiants: 1. Signature: Name: lAffiant Name] Date: 2. Signature: Name: lAffiant Name] Date: 3. Signature: Name: (Affiant Name] Date: 4. Signature: Name: (Affiant Name] Date: 5. Signature: Name: lAffiant Name] Date: 6. Signature: Name: lAffiant Name! Date: 7. Signature: Name: lAffiant Name I Date: 8. Signature: Name: lAffiant Name] Date: 9. Signature: Name: lAffiant Name] Date: 10. Signature: Name: lAffiant Name] Date: Page 352 exhibits attached to affidavit document 1/2 r..'• --. i -,,,,,,.;-. - ',.t. i ty\-i-4,--Exhibit 1. Image taken from a video3 --: of Mayor Mitch Roth 8/23/23 Nov. I NEWS H ) UPDATE Exhibit 2.Press Release 8/26/ 23 Hawaii County To Participate In Cities Forward Program 0000 4.,Exhibit 3. 9/26 Mexico City ICLEI 4.. .. event 1 40 3"—: tE4'. aaa JP s ICLEI 3a ck ii=ftli ?"ip p•Ar.---, : _ *" Exhibit 4 ICC ICLEI website Intelligent Cities Challenge vab.......,,,•;:v. -,,,4....„:,...._,.., Al i' •strt A..,le quo vnal I rin..-,At a'.f.,..r,II,F.,,,In Cer,nk.on,II,I',A%ow n.....-ClvilAns.'I'r)i-,... kk . • •.4„. e^wed ka sesolc phase.P a-ocus on the artel ard iØ2i transition I:..I proside ha pan(piwa Mr 1,-..,:l.o.pp-e•4,-ri 1,...,1.12.•-w...t op.,rt mil.*IA r.v.op anr ifl-.port i rea r,.... Dee 5 In S str.m.eiptcial i!ri e•ere.rrpb Ir.v tInd I:ass t•Jsaio-.Pse.N.',.. s-.0 alx,$,'4:e the,mt P-Tor 1.i,a1,gy:o..Y.1,c.r..4.4.1 ockk,...1....1 p101Ottiw I00 4...pV.ti.JtPd ukkol...),....1..1...ir se.h.,,,3 r1,y V. Exopean Green)eal usul green Cea s whl,tie ICC'ours on wrserrenAts....hen lit:tes ed their 1.-al,:n,.h....,wit a y...sh on erml I.Ir MIA,.,:MI or ir•pou... ConIad: 1•10.1. 1,4.(,,.nonv, IC,caw,wo Irev,4,41 Fig,.roiliN 3,i.Inc,pr irl.Nn.-n.vi ripen?tu.ppo^Jere,CC avh,ory anr.C.ty oear net....r,s.:Zuropeirs a-...;,awa toc.-a I and.e:arre V31'ng and cca:n rig.ICL "s trap:ass 4 in ILI,pon ng a ca•-..c.,01 ng cii,-:through a L...a'C-c:. Jez I xair ng 6.>.uch-g prop arm.c Page 353 exhibits attached to affidavit document 2/2 fa SOL IF Exhibit 5. 1 41\tdi ICLEI conference in 2024 Ott, FRECIA CE111(LLOS F: riegtTy Rcol Cteire Developn.ent Digital Products 4dmscry servoces Sustanoexh-yalresavanon Porr foto Vrt. i P altet Sitiart City J.* One place, a thousand Exhibit 6. Planet Smart City in444:04-1* ,44opportunities--;__.„ ,proximity to We design,buiId,andconsutonh:rgeIe runttriwrire..,.. Fortaleza Brazil housing projects weorIctwice to accelerate Real' Estate,innovation using a replIcabl-,sellable 1/04.40"mod'41 kokkattatryt 11,:or 400104'4 Learn more about us 11 ViPle Page 354 DeVera, Ashley From: noreply@konveio.email Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 11:31 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Konveio Inquiry] Hawaiian lands Dianne Hensley (sent a message using the contact form at https://cohplanning.konveio.com/contact. Is the UN influencing Hawaii lawmakers with regard to Hawaiian lands... Chat history 1Page 355 DeVera, Ashley From: Adam Roberts < Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 10:43 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Aloha, After reading through this plan, it looks like many things in it will regulate and fine residents. It does not appear to help our communities. I request that this plan be revised to benefit the current residents and land owners of this island. Mahalo, Laura 1Page 356 DeVera, Ashley From: Planning General Plan Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 2:03 PM To:Marti Morishige Cc: Planning General Plan; repilagan@capitol.hawaii.gov Subject: RE: General Plan Engagement and Updates Attachments: General Plan Engagement and Updates Aloha Marti, We just released this morning a public notice (see attached) that includes links to the public comments received so far, as well as video, Q&A and comments from each of the community meetings. We anticipate the Puna Q&A doc will be completed and uploaded this week. As for Shipman, we know they updated their village master plan but have no information as to the timing of them moving forward with any development plans. Either way, it will require them to apply for a rezoning, which is a multi-public hearing process at Planning Commission and County Council. Mahalo, General Plan Team County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 I Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone: (808)961-8288 I Email:GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov Website:www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov ri C13 County of Hawai'i General Plan 2045 Planning for a Sustainable Future Project Website:cohplanning.konveio.com From: Marti Morishige< Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 1:24 PM To: Planning General Plan <generalplan@hawaiicounty.gov>; repilagan@capitol.hawaii.gov Subject: Re: General Plan Engagement and Updates Aloha County Staff! I am a member of the Puna Community Development Committee. We had our recent meeting on Thursday, October 3, at 5pm. The General Plan was presented and many community members had questions and input about the Plan. Will those comments be published soon along with these on the site right now? Page 357 At that meeting I spoke to the staff from the Planning Department and highly recommended that Keaau be labeled as a major urban area or at least a Medium density Urban designation. Keaau is unique in that the Shipman Ltd has much of the land around Keaau Village. Shipman already published in the newspaper in early 2024 the subdividing of land makai and makua of Keaau Village road 130 into small housing lots. My understanding is that they will eventually subdivide their land that is makua of Shipman Park which is a huge area of land that would become housing lots, possibly close to a one thousand lots or more. In 2020 when the census was taken, the population of the area around Keaau was a mixture of urban and rural. With the likelihood of Shipman Ltd. moving ahead before 2045 with their urban density subdivisions, this must be considered at this time when making the General Plan. Already Shipman developed the Shipman Industrial Park, which is light to heavy industrial that fits into the definition of High-Density Urban (HDU). Has the Planning Department talked in detail with Shipman Ltd about the General Plan and their company's development plans? Please reply to this email. Mahalo! Martha Morishige, member of Puna Community Development Committee On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 11:58 AM General Plan Team <GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov>wrote: General Plan Engagement and Updates Date: 10/03/2024 2:59 PM We are excited to announce several important updates on the General Plan website! These resources will help keep you informed and engaged as we move through the next phases of this critical process for the General Plan Comprehensive Review. Here's what's new: 1. Community Meeting Q&A's: We've added the Questions and Answers from our recent community meetings. These documents provide detailed responses to the inquiries that were raised, allowing everyone to stay up to date on key topics discussed. 2024 GP Community Meeting Q&A 2. Individual Comments from General Plan Workshops: To ensure transparency, we've published the individual comments collected from the General Plan workshops. 2Page 358 2024 Draft Public Comments 3. Upcoming Planning Commission Meeting Dates: The next stage of the General Plan involves discussions at the Planning Commission. You can now find the upcoming meeting dates on the website. We encourage public participation in these important sessions. Planning Commission Website We invite you to visit the General Plan website to explore these new additions and stay engaged in shaping the future of our island community. Mahalo for your continued involvement and support! Change your eNotification preference. Unsubscribe from all Hawaii County, HI eNotifications. 3Page 359 DeVera, Ashley From: Rebecca M Pierotti < Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 4:08 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Punalu'u urban development designation for 2045 County General Draft Plan Aloha, I have not yet had a chance to read through the entire plan as listed on the Konveio link, but have perused a few topics and read some public comments. My main concern is what was highlighted in the recent edition of the Ka'u Calendar, indicating that Urban designation (low, medium and high) are planned for areas mauka and makai of Punalu'u. I was completely taken aback when I read this! In light of the recent oppositional testimony with standing granted, regarding the proposed resort at Punalu'u, these designations are obviously not in alignment with the Ka'u Community Development plan, a reflection of residential values. The Big Island has changed so much, with increased luxury development and resorts, and an inundation of tourists and wealthy looking to have a third or fourth home, or just to move and retire. Welcome to Konafornia. I work in land surveying, and have seen and spent time in every single area of the Big Island, with a more intimate relationship with the wilderness and lands of Ka'u and the National Park which is where I reside. Ka'u, specifically the area near and surrounding Punalu'u is the piko of all the Hawaiian Islands. It deserves protection and respect. This is a sensitive issue for many, myself included. Aloha, Rebecca Rebecca M Pierotti 1Page 360 DeVera, Ashley From: Sidney Fuke < Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 9:17 AM To:Planning General Plan; Kern, Zendo; Darrow, Jeff Subject: Draft Updated General Plan LUPAG Map - Kona Country Club - Mauka Golf Course Attachments: GP Amendment Request.pdf Aloha all: Please find attached my October 2,2019 letter which also included my September 24,2015 letter relating to the subject matter. The letters requested that the LUPAG designation of the area of the abandoned golf course located mauka of Ali' i Drive be changed to either Urban Expansion or Low Density, consistent with the surrounding area. We note that the draft does not accommodate this request. Perhaps it was your understanding that the abandoned golf course will eventually be resurrected. Rest assured that that is not the case. Please note that the landowner currently has already submitted applications to have this area subdivided. Accordingly, on behalf of the landowner, Kona Country Club, we again renew its request to have this area redesignated UE or Low Density on the LUPAG map, and if not, an explanation as to its retention. Thank you very much! Sid 1Page 361 SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant mile r.r100 Pauahi Street,Suite 212•Hilo,Hawaii 96720 Planning•Variance•ZoningTelephone:(808)969-1522 Cell:(808)989-0640 Subdivision•Land Use Permits E-mail:sidfuke@hawaiiantel.net Environmental Reports October 2, 2019 Mr. Michael Yee, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 ATTN: Ms. Bethany Morrison Dear Mr. Yee: Subject:General Plan Update Program - Kona Country Club, line. Keauhou,North Kona,Hawai i,TMK:7-8-010: 051,077,and 082 Thank you very much for taking time to discuss the on-going General Plan update program with me and others yesterday. It was very informative. As discussed,your tentative timetable is to solicit public comments on the first draft by the end of this month and then come forth with a revised one in the first quarter of next year. The revised document would again be subject to public review/comment before forwarding it to the Planning Commissions for review and comment and ultimately to the County Council by the late second and third quarters of 2020 for possible decision before the end of 2020. In that regard, I note that in the current draft,the Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide LUPAG)map for the Keauhou area affecting the now defunct golf course mauka of Ali'i Drive and owned by Kona Country Club, Inc.has changed from"Open"to a new category called Recreation". Please note that in the attached letter,dated September 24, 2015,we outlined several reasons for having the designation changed to either"Urban Expansion"or"Low Density". In addition to the reasons outlined in that letter,we would also briefly like to add that because of declining interest in golf many golf courses have no longer become economically sustainable and hence are being abandoned and transitioned to other uses. The situation here is no different here, and thus its retention as a golf course recreation area on the LUPAG map would not be realistic. Further,a"Low Density Urban" designation in the area of the former golf course would allow residential use, a use that is consistent with the adjoining residential developments. Relatedly, inasmuch as other land use entitlements such as a zone change and Page 362 Mr. Michael Yee, Director October 2, 2019 Page 2 SMA are still required, during the review process, there will be ample opportunity to review considerations such as open space, infrastructure, archaeological, affordable housing, and so forth. For the reasons outlined above,on behalf of Kona Country Club, Inc.,we again renew its request to have the area encumbered by the former golf course mauka ofAli'i Drive be designated"Low Density Urban". Should you have any questions or require more information on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much! iticeyy, wiv\d) SIDNEY M. Hi KE Planning Consultant Enclosure Copy—Kona Country Club, Inc. w/enclosure via email Page 363 SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant 100 Pauahi Street,Suite 212•Hilo,Hawaii 96720Planning Variance••zoning miAWF mimr Telephone:(808)969-1522•Cell:(808)989-0640 Subdivision•Land Use Permits E-mail:sidfuke©hawaiiantel.net Environmental Reports September 24, 2015 Mr. Duane Kanuha,Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo,HI 96720 Dear Mr. Kanuha: Subject:General Plan Update Request-Kona Country Club,Inc. Keauhou,North Kona,Hawaii,TMK:7-8-010: 051 077 and 082 Beginning February 6,2015,the Department officially commenced its mandatory 10-year comprehensive update of the County General Plan. Your website noted that the public had an opportunity to provide initial comments on this by June 6, 2015. The Department will review these comments and internal and/or consulted studies between June 6 to April 2017, after which public workshops will be held to review proposed recommendations. A revised draft of the recommendations is expected to be submitted to the Leeward and Windward Planning Commissions and County Council for further review and appropriate action between August 2017 to January 2018. During the course of this process,there will understandably be ample opportunity for further public input. The.subject properties is the site of the Kona Country Club mauka golf course,which consists of three(3)tax map key numbers (FMK: 7-8-01.0: 051, 077, and 082),with a combined area of 201.428 acres. (Figure 1) Given your projected timetable as noted above and while belated with respect to the initial June 6 deadline, on behalf of the landowner(Kona Country Club,Inc.), we respectfully request your favorable consideration in having the subject properties re-designated on the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG)map from Open to either Urban Expansion (which would be similar to much ofthe adjoining properties) or Low Density IJrhsan_ The reasons for this request are: 1. Such a designation would make it generally consistent with other golf courses not in the"Resort Node." Currently, golf courses in a resort area(while zoned Open)fall within the Resort Node category of the LUPAG map. These include resorts like Mauna Kea,Mauna Lani, Waikoloa, Hualalai/Kuki'o, and Keauhou. Page 364 Mr.Duane Kanuha, Director September 24, 2015 Page 2 For golf courses situated outside of a Resort Node,for the most part the LUPAG map designations are similar to the adjoining properties. For example,the Big Island Country Club golf course at Pu uanahulu is designated Rural,while the Makalei Country Club golf course is designated Extensive Agriculture. This concept also applies to golf courses proximate to and generally considered part of existing Resort Nodes. These include the Kuki'oiNanea golf courses which are designated either Medium or Low Density and the Extensive Agriculture designation of the Hapuna Prince Golf Course, all ofwhich are situated mauka of the Queen Ka ahumanu Highway. The Kona Country Club's mauka golf course is the only course within and/or proximate to a LUPAG map Resort Node that is designated Open. Following along the same principles,the course should thus be designated Urban Expansion,Low Density,or Medium Density. 2: Having such a designation enables the landowner to explore alternative uses of the property,uses that would be generally consistent with the surrounding area. One possible use could be the introduction of a few residences within the golf course to help financially sustain the operations of the golf course,a use that is currently not allowed because of the existing Open zoning. In either event, any change in use or modification of the existing golf course use will require ample public and government review vis a vis the rezoning and Special Management Area processes. Again,we respectfully request your favorable consideration ofKona Country Club,Inc.'s request. Should you have any questions or wish further information on this matter,please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much! Sinerely, iA . /\\ \,? SIDNEY M. FUKE Planning Consultant Enclosure Copy—Kona Country Club,Inc.w/enclosure via email Page 365 t. 1 y Q., jN i cif 7-4 •1, , k A NI 9A.' 1.1;'-';,%-t' --' II l''t.i'44%, a 0 f S'FF4 k p 4r a t ice,%A o-', - Jt •` A`c,=` ,£,i 1" f 31 e* a _ 1 iki' `;' " P d s et > ri ,, e f a ii J "y 8 Z f c x t o t {— a 41 3,.F RS 4 d Z f 5t.,,4 E 14 k fl 1 1 2` .1 9. ,'... i'2, i, tit-,-.rr-4 j - , , a ui....i :. 9 N'y,a. q^, 444i t Ir''''''''.3 pg . 4,t ._..-.------1 , + ao- 1,as 1 wc.•,asst it i tYv:tT Kk F t 4 k,La" ' w..$ + .fig Q Page 366 ewi SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant Environmental Reports October 10, 2024 Leeward Planning Commission Windward Planning Commission do Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Leeward and Windward Planning Commissions: Subject:General Plan Update Program -Kona Country Club,Inc. Kcauhou,North Kona,Hawaii,TMK:7-8-010: 051,077,082 The subject properties are the site of the former Kona Country Club golf course located on the mauka side of Ali'i Drive. That course was closed, and the owner has no plans to resurrect its use. As a matter of fact,there are pending applications to subdivide the properties. As such, in letters, dated September 24,2015 and October 2,2019, on behalf of the landowner, Kona Country Club, it was requested that the subject properties be redesignated from"Open"to either"Urban Expansion"or"Low Density"on the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide("LUPAG")map. The new designation would enable the site to be potentially used for residential and related uses, consistent with the surrounding residential uses. Further, whether designated"Urban Expansion"or"Low or Medium Density" on the LUPAG map, it would not preclude golf course use. Examples of such would be the Makani Golf Course (Rural), Makalei Golf Course (Extensive Agriculture),Kuki'o Golf Course and Nanea Golf Course (Medium or Low Density). Golf courses like Waikoloa, Hapuna, and Mauna Kea fall within the Resort node. It should be noted that the former mauka Kona Country Club golf course is the only course that was within or proximate to a Resort node is designated Open. We would also like to note that because of declining interest in golf, many golf courses have no longer become economically sustainable and hence are being abandoned and transitioned to other uses. A classic example is the "repurposed"use of nine (9) Page 367 Leeward Planning Commission Windward Planning Commission October 10,2024 Page 2 holes at the Waikoloa Resort. The situation here is no different here, and thus its retention as an Open area on the LUPAG map would not be realistic. A"Low Density" designation would allow residential use, a use that is consistent with the adjoining residential developments. Relatedly, inasmuch as other land use entitlements such as a zone change and SMA are still required, during the review process, there will be ample opportunity to review considerations such as open space, infrastructure, archaeological, affordable housing, and so forth. In reviewing the draft LUPAG map,we note that the landowner's request was not accommodated. For the reasons outlined above, on behalf of Kona Country Club, Inc., we again renew its request to have the area covered by the former golf course mauka of Alii Drive be designated"Low Density" on the LUPAG map. Should you have any questions or require more information on this matter,please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much! Sincerely, 1 lA ' SIDNEY M. FUKE Planning Consultant Enclosure Copy—Kona Country Club, Inc. w/enclosure via email Page 368 ASidneyFuke, Planning Consultant 100 Pauahi Street,Suite 212•Hilo,Hawaii 96720 Planning•variance•Zoning A711' w Telephone:(808) 969-1522 Cell:(808) 989-0640 Subdivision•Land Use Permits E-mail:sidfuke@hawaiiantel.net Environmental Reports October 2, 2019 Mr. Michael Yee, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 ATTN: Ms. Bethany Morrison Dear Mr. Yee: Subject:General Pliant Update Program -Kona Country Ciub, Inc. Keauhou,North Kona, Hawaii,TMK:7-S-010: 051,077, and 082 Thank you very much for taking time to discuss the on-going General Plan update program with me and others yesterday. It was very informative. As discussed,your tentative timetable is to solicit public comments on the first draft by the end of this month and then come forth with a revised one in the first quarter of next year. The revised document would again be subject to public review/comment before forwarding it to the Planning Commissions for review and comment and ultimately to the County Council by the late second and third quarters of 2020 for possible decision before the end of 2020. In that regard, I note that in the current draft,the Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide LUPAG)map for the Keauhou area affecting the now defunct golf course mauka of Atli Drive and owned by Kona Country Club, Inc.has changed from"Open"to a new category called Recreation". Please note that in the attached letter, dated September 24, 2015,we outlined several reasons for having the designation changed to either"Urban Expansion"or"Low Density". In addition to the reasons outlined in that letter,we would also briefly like to add that because of declining interest in golf,many golf courses have no longer become economically sustainable and hence are being abandoned and transitioned to other uses. The situation here is no different here, and thus its retention as a golf course recreation area on the LUPAG map would not be realistic. Further,a"Low Density Urban"designation in the area of the former golf course would allow residential use,a use that is consistent with the adjoining residential developments. Relatedly, inasmuch as other land use entitlements such as a zone change and Page 369 Mr. Michael Yee, Director October 2, 2019 Page 2 SMA are still required, during the review process, there will be ample opportunity to review considerations such as open space, infrastructure, archaeological, affordable housing, and so forth. For the reasons outlined above, on behalf of Kona Country Club, Inc., we again renew its request to have the area encumbered by the foliner golf course mauka of Ali'i Drive be designated"Low Density Urban". Should you have any questions or require more information on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much! incey y, 41,\) SIDNEY M. FUKE Planning Consultant Enclosure Copy—Kona Country Club, Inc. w/enclosure via email Page 370 SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant i=I 100 Pauahi Street,Suite 212•Hilo,Hawaii 96720 Planning•Variance•Zoning Telephone:(808)969-1522•Cell:(808)989-0640 Subdivision•Land Use Permits E-mail:sidfuke@hawaiiantel.net Environmental Reports September 24, 2015 Mr. Duane Kanuha,Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo,HI 96720 Dear Mr. Kanuha: Subject:General Plan Update Request-Rena Country Club,Inc. Keauhou,North Kona,Hawaii,TI :7-8-010: 051,077,and 082 Beginning February 6,2015,the Department officially commenced its mandatory 10-year comprehensive update of the County General Plan. Your website noted that the public had an opportunity to provide.initial comments on this by June 6,2015. The Department will review these comments and internal and/or consulted studies between June 6 to April 2017, after which public workshops will-be held to review proposed recommendations. A revised draft of the recommendations is expected to be submitted to the Leeward and Windward Planning Commissions and County Council for further review and appropriate action between August 2017 to January 2018. During the course of this process,there will understandably be ample opportunity for further public input. The subject properties is the site ofthe Kona Country Club mauka golf course,which consists of three(3)tax map key numbers(TMX.: 7-8-010: 051, 077, and 082),with a combined area of 201.428 acres. (Figure 1) Given your projected timetable as noted above and while belated with respect to the initial June 6 deadline, on behalf of the landowner(Kona Country Club, Inc.),we respectfully request your favorable consideration in having the subject properties re-designated on the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide(LUPAG)map from Open to either Urban Expansion (which would be similar to much ofthe adjoining properties) or Low Density Urban_ The reasons for this request are: 1. Such a designation would make it generally consistent with other golf courses not in the"Resort Node." Currently, golf courses in a resort area(while zoned Open)fall within the Resort Node category of the LUPAG map. These include resorts like Mauna Kea,Mauna Lath, Waikoloa, Hualalai/Kuki`o, and Keanhou. Page 371 Mr.Duane Kanuha,Director September 24, 2015 Page 2 For golf courses situated outside of a Resort Node,for the most part the LUPAG map designations are similar to the adjoining properties. For example,the Big Island Country Club golf course at Pu'uanahulu is designated Rural,while the Makalei Country Club golf course is designated Extensive Agriculture. This concept also applies to golf courses proximate to and generally considered part of existing Resort Nodes. These include the Kuki'oiNanea golf courses which are designated either Medium or Low Density and the Extensive Agriculture designation of the Hapuna Prince Golf Course, all of which are situated mauka of the Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. The Kona Country Club's mauka golf course is the only course within and/or proximate to a LUPAG map Resort Node that is designated Open. Following along the same principles,the course should thus be designated Urban Expansion,Low Density,or Medium Density. 2. Having such a designation enables the landowner to explore alternative uses of the property,uses that would be generally consistent with the surrounding area. One possible use could be the introduction of a few residences within the golf course to help financially sustain the operations of the golf course, a use that is currently not allowed because of the existing Open zoning. In either event, any change in use or modification of the existing golf course use will require ample public and government review vis a vis the rezoning and Special Management Area processes. Again,we respectfully request your favorable consideration of Kona Country Club,Inc.'s request. Should you have any questions or wish further information on this matter,please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much! Sincerely, NCA * r SIDNEY M. FUKE Planning Consultant Enclosure Copy—Kona Country Club,Inc.w/enclosure via email Page 372 j' u 4 ! or.$a¢ 7.1 Fs 1BvK' ^ i a 6. µyt i,° L E; 4 5+ g 4;:;"7:1 Ae5 w,a P : v.: tr„ t -::-','''''r"'"'-'°-.y,,. 3 Ik * y... ^ 5 Y ist„.? ...' '.,:::,'„i,"st.t''.':'''''';'71 '-;•—•:::.' '› c' j7 'is' "'-, \TC. \. ts t'''S\ '''''''tt '''. t ' t i' .. .¢ ti ,af, r" t of s P• y i1 isidA' hb,, 1,!-. 1;,,,.,-;.,,,,,,,,;,„,',,,..;' G)' . 4{ t J f1.-raS4' a'mss: , 0-,,,,,,,---,'. AmelmIgi r i,. 7-2.44,:-T, y1, i r ", ,Aa."° ".'^ yam t s_ ,,,,_,...`". 74 1 igi ?'aas, 4.ri ,, t,'" tit•iv. C tzs s o + a• xx K 3.z y 4?ep`` "d t. . R S•,-.ems n a t1 ''a „i Y.e A, d 5aIms -'Y v d r, r ":, x 61A„,, try;y 4 Xr N. i d,„ N m.,_ 4i S.:Y .y•, k a._x d &r t. s 101 _` 1 x gg r J N t x i t z li. ,./" r.` ice- .,. t o t. i£.N a $IP n — z E I' t f a i t t ''',,,,,,i...-`7,1;4.;,..: s, —»' f r' s,"' ate w4-, tft 1 spa 4 N kJ 3 M I ia' _ w -,531 's.g3F * a ' 4t..,- aqS:2 y4 t ad a. d C Page 373 oc,A'' ` RS, 9 HAWAII REGIONAL COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS October 22, 2024 TO: Kona Community Development Plan Action Committee FROM: Mark Anthony Clemente Government Relations Hawaii Regional Council of Carpenters SUBJECT: Final Draft General Plan 2045 On behalf of the Hawaii Regional Council of Carpenters, I am writing to express our strong support for initiatives aimed at revitalizing the community of Kona through local job creation and sustainable development. As one of the few organizations advocating for affordable housing, we recognize that ensuring access to safe and affordable homes is critical for the future of our community. It is essential that we support our local high school graduates by creating job opportunities that pay a living wage. When young people can secure good jobs in their own community, it enables them to stay, thrive, and contribute to Kona's growth. Investing in the development of infrastructure in Kona—such as roads,public facilities, and utilities—will help create a more resilient community. Developments of a center/complex for major cultural, educational, and recreational activities as well as an Aging and Disability Resource Center in underserved population centers such as Kona would contribute to community resilience. We urge that projects awarded to contractors prioritize hiring local skilled craftspeople, ensuring that our neighbors benefit from the work being done in their own backyards. This investment not only supports the local economy but also fosters pride and ownership among residents. Furthermore, all projects on county lands must be covered under HRS § 104, which ensures prevailing wages. Living wages are essential for attracting and retaining skilled tradespeople, ultimately leading to higher-quality workmanship and improved project outcomes. By adhering to these standards, we can ensure that the work being done in Kona is of the highest caliber, contributing to a stronger and more sustainable community. Mahalo for the opportunity to provide testimony. STATE HEADQUARTERS & BUSINESS OFFICES OAHU: 1311 Houghtailing Street,Honolulu Hawaii 96817-2712 • Ph.(808) 847-5761 Fax(808)440-9188 HILO OFFICE: 525 KilaueaAvenue,Room 205,Hilo,Hawaii 96720-3050 • Ph.(808)935-8575 Fax(808)935-8576 KONA OFFICE: 75-126 Lunapule Road,Kailua-Kona,Hawaii 96740-2106 • Ph.(808)329-7355 Fax(808)326-9376 MAUI OFFICE: 330 Hookahi Street,Wailuku,Maui 96793-1449 • Ph.(808)242-6891 Fax(808)242-5961 KAUAI OFFICE: Kuhio Medical Ctr Bldg.,3-3295 Kuhio Hwy,Suite 201,Lihue,Kauai 96766-1040 • Ph.(808)245-8511 Fax(808)245-8911 Page 374 Public Comments Received via Email with the same 75 Page Attachment (page 495) Page 375 DeVera, Ashley From: Cathryn Turley < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 10: 53 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony - Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, 1Page 376 Cathryn Turley ' 2Page 377 DeVera, Ashley From: Ted Sanchez < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 9:48 PM To:Planning General Plan https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf 1Page 378 DeVera, Ashley From: ascendingstarseed < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 7:28 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: I DO NOT CONSENT TO UN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR HAWAII (OR THE USA) Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the PDF link and revise the general plan accordingly. I've been aware of the UN's 2021/2030 Agenda's for well over 15yrs and do not consent to these agenda's, and I agree with the revisions requested in the PDF. PDF link: https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Do you serve the people of Hawaii, or unelected members of the UN? Thank you for your time and consideration. Much Mahalo, Annette O'Toole Hawaii island resident 1Page 379 DeVera, Ashley From: Rebecca Melendez < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 7:05 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, Rebecca Melendez 1Page 380 DeVera, Ashley From: cyd shiroma < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 7:01 PM To: Planning General Plan Subject: Revision to Hawaii General Plan Testimony Attachments: WebPage.pdf Attention Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of the Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown out and redone to represent "The People" and not the "Stakeholders". The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over -regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more. How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Thank you Cyd Shiroma 1Page 381 DeVera, Ashley From: Joanna Weber < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 6:45 PM To: Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown out and re -done. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing, and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support, and economic alternatives which support farmers and home -owners and not put people in boxes while over -regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please, review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Mahalo JOANNA WEBER 1Page 382 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 6:42 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Big Island Planning Department, The plan you've drafted is not focused on a positive result for the Big Island, it is not inline with the Hawaiian people. Hawaii is a special and sacred gift and you are not treating it or its people as such. Hawaii's unique culture must be preserved at all costs. The Islands and its people must not be sold out as your plan is planning to do. What you have created is very suspicious. What is behind stripping Hawaii of everything it is to turn it into a poor copy of any non-descript state on the mainland??Why do you seek to strip away the freedom of the people and add layers of government overreach? Your plan needs a major revision. We want to see you define a structure to support the communities, the families, and the farmers. Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo, Anne Lurski 1Page 383 DeVera, Ashley From: Ranalynn Naipo < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 5:03 PM To:Planning General Plan Cc:James MataBishop; Macy's S12spring Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Ranalynn Naipo Hawaii County Resident https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Sent from my iPad 1Page 384 DeVera, Ashley From: Debbie Trimboli < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 5:23 PM To:Planning General Plan Cc: Debbie Trimboli Subject: Revise Big Island General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo nui boa! Debbie Trimboli What lies behind us and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us". - Ralph Waldo Emerson Page 385 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 6:37 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: TO: GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov -- Aloha, we DO NOT agree with or consent to this General Plan & support the attached version with required changes for your reference. Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf TO: GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov -- Aloha, we DO NOT agree with or consent to this General Plan & support the attached version with required changes for your reference. iPage 386 DeVera, Ashley From: Mark Hurtado < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 6:24 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island General Plan does not support a better future. It needs to be revised or completely redone. The current plan increases regulations, fines, restricts travel, and pushes people into crowded housing. It lacks a clear path to help communities grow. The focus of the plan is on "Sustainability," but it should prioritize "Innovation." We need solutions that create thriving communities, protect the environment, and offer economic alternatives that benefit farmers and homeowners, without excessive regulation. Much of the language in the plan, like "cluster," "stakeholder," and "buffer zones," is used in similar plans across the U.S., raising concerns about its local relevance. Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan. Mahalo Mark Hurtado Hawaii County Resident 1Page 387 DeVera, Ashley From: MarG < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 4:25 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony.pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Sincerely, Gail H. Mar Attachment: Page 388 DeVera, Ashley From: Margot Bogdonavich < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 4:40 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. This whole plan is not what people would want. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. If this goes through most of the public will not be better off. It feels like a step towards total control for everyone & everywhere. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! Get rid of the word stakeholder. This definitely sounds like the World Economic Forum talk, which should have NO place in our government. How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo C.S. Jenkins Kona Page 389 DeVera, Ashley From: NANCY THORNES < Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 4:30 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo nancy Thornes Page 390 DeVera, Ashley From: Anne Yelken < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 6:24 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: General plan should be revised Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Dave and Anne Yelken 1Page 391 DeVera, Ashley From: Wendy Hoag < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 4:59 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, Wendy Hoag Wendy Hoag I president Wendy Hoag Design, Inc. Page 392 DeVera, Ashley From: Eileen Downing < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 3:55 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Housing General Plan Attachments: Big lslandGeneralPlan2045Testimony.pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Eileen Downing Page 393 DeVera, Ashley From: Michelle Melendez < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 7:43 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: re: Testimony on General Plan Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha, Honestly, I don't know how the Big Island planning department could write something that looks like a communist agenda. I have to believe you were given this plan and didn't read it. The plan says that you want to limit travel, which violates the Constitution and you will be sued for doing so. You want to put people into "clustered" housing and take them out of rural areas. You want to impose more regulations, which will create more fines against the way people currently live. You want to create buffer" zones that limit people enjoying the nature around them. Have you read this plan? Please see the attached document. It was created by locals who Love Big Island and we hope you do too. Take this pdf seriously because what you are proposing will destroy this island! Mahalo, Michelle Melendez- Fitness and Wellness Expert Since 1996 Author Of The Best Selling and 4x Award Winning Book, End Dieting Hell:How to find peace in your body and release the weight Order your copy of End Dieting Hell Click Here Great Maui Land Grab"NOW Available here 1Page 394 DeVera, Ashley From: syntha lorenz < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 7:27 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Testimony Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. thank you kindly, 04Psyntha lorenz Page.27 Implementation etrategiea Please dia.,to,pdate regula,cns ta alignon.Me goals o 1,,Con.u ard.c nera,Man CONCERN:The worVlionemne,is net writtenanywhere in heentire Man That isVERY Wly are yau can,homemilms out oft.yeneral ha will affect rem o. suggesled inMrs tlearmell 41so pleasebe clearatoulv,,o these pnoate entDesare hatyou making process CONCERN:The cemmunit,dem,. krawwro Stakeholders are and EXACT,Ate(.ey have stakem cane define 86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e 1Page 395 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 7:50 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Fw: PLEASE Kokua!! Send in an email - address below - my personal testimony based on this model to follow To Whom It May Concern, Residents of Hawaii are very concerned with the Agenda 30 plan we have read about. We do NOT want more controls and mandates for the Big Island. We want growth and innovation. Here is a much better plan that actual Hawaii residents put together, that addresses every line of your plan. Please take this seriously. We do not want or need controls. We are a smart population and capable of handling this without interference. https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/action This PDF revision shows line-by-line the revisions to this "Agenda 30" that 5 Hawaii residents worked on for a week. IT is what all of us want, what THE PEOPLE want. You need to listen carefully to what WE want, not what YOU want. THank you. https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Respectfully, Sheryl A. Shohet Hawaii Resident See General Plan Link: https://cohplanning.konveio.com/general-plan t Help STOP U.N. gendaif I111 b '"" Big I lnd... Testi mon Due Thurs. Se i t. 26th Help STOP U.N.Agenda On Big Island Hawaii!! Testimony Due Thurs. Sept. 26th) youtu.be 1Page 396 DeVera, Ashley From: Helene Minard < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 7:22 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Helene Minard https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf 1Page 397 DeVera, Ashley From: Siobhan Wisdom < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 6:52 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Hawaii Big Island Plan Testimony Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Hawaii Big Island General Plan Testimony Due Sept. 26th, 2024 See General Plan Click Here! Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, Judy Wisdom 1Page 398 DeVera, Ashley From: Uala Lenta < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 8:50 PM To:hawaiiplan@hawaiicounty.gov; Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii general plan testimony here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Uala Lenta https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Page 399 DeVera, Ashley From: Leslee Cook < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 8:14 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Sept 26 my written testimony Re: The Revise General Plan for Hawaii Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island General Plan does not support the future we residents living on The Big Island, want. It is suspicious that it is very vague and doesn't it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or better yet, completely revamped, below you will see an attachment outlining where it needs to be revised. The current General Plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. This plan has no conclusive instructions of how to help our communities to prosper. This is NOT in our best interests. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We the residents are watching your votes and we want to you to honor us and choose a plan that moves toward thriving communities, environmental support (like recycling and opportunities to sell up-cycled products) and economic alternatives such as grants or even better is subsidized farms or community gardens that support farmer's markets and classes throughout k- 12th grade teaching children how to grow healthy food that doesn't use pesticides that run-off and harm our reefs and fish. Education programs that teach homeowners how to use their land better instead of lawns to plant their own food and raise their own food for consumption and selling at farmers markets. Which will cut down on importing so many products which eases environmental impacts while creating businesses for our residents. NOT PUTTING PEOPLE IN BOXES AND OVER REGULATING THEM. We are not idiots! This Big Island General Plan you have, wasn't created by you, it is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language???? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly, we are paying close attention to your votes and actions. Mahalo nui loa, Leslee Cook & 50 fellow residents on the Big Island and adjoining Hawaiian Islands. https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/ files/ugd/86fc0c b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Page 400 DeVera, Ashley From: Sharon Hutchison < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 5:36 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Sharon Hutchison https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Sent from my iPhone 1Page 401 DeVera, Ashley From: Ali Eden < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 9:17 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: General Plan Kona https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Is this global agenda really what you want to leave to your keiki? 1Page 402 DeVera, Ashley From: Emma Beverage < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 9:25 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, I may not be a resident but I am observing what you are doing and it appears to be very far away from being 'good!' The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability"when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Emma Beverage Page 403 https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/ files/ugd/86fc0c b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf 2Page 404 DeVera, Ashley From: brigitte masters < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 10:22 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Brigitte Masters Page 405 DeVera, Ashley From: Helen Higa < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 10:29 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony HERE Importance: High Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. After what we learned from the Lahaina Fires, it is vital for ALL of us to focus ourselves on goals that the people of Hawaii Island need and outlined in the REVISED general plan PDF attached below. The `general plan" as it reads now should be revised as follows OR thrown-out and redone.(See PDF link below). The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". I am a retired music teacher who has spent many vacations on the Big Island.As a child we stayed with my uncle's family in Kona. I LOVE the BIG Island and visit as often as I can (staying at the Manago Hotel). I always go to Teshima's for Tempura and sashimi and Ho'o nau' nau. We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! I personally have over 30 years of annual summer travel to teach Suzuki violin to children in who attend the Seattle,Utah, California, Colorado or Idaho Institutes. I no longer travel to CA, since the Santa Rosa fires destroyed the bucolic Ursula High School and Elementary school where we held classes every summer. After the fires, I witnessed Light Rail and Agenda 21 , attempting to transform the formerly tranquil, laid back, VERY green and beautiful area into? I have no idea or desire to return. After the fires the workshop was forced to move 1Page 406 to San Fransisco State University. COVID mandates have lowered attendance at many workshops and they can no longer hire as many teachers. Although I am still able to teach each summer in Utah, Idaho and Seattle, I have witnessed Seattle also transform from a very "hip" and fun city into areas with"Stack and Pack" sardine- like housing and terrible traffic that I now see in Salt Lake City AND Seattle. These are brand new condos near our hotel what I saw in Draper, near Sandy, Utah. June 2024: r, s ti— ns IV G i i 1 ) r, °E..", 1 , I:JA, lt aARO! irrik'-„,'6`)..,- . o .: i v n Li . a 1. ., 4141471.11 ,. —Afitrio w,— 1• , fir, 4 r err We used to be housed in Sandy, Utah which went from fields with horses that we fed to the CityHall and Performing Arts Venues and Concert Hall. How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and REVISE the general plan accordingly. Please DO THE RIGHT THING and seriously consider these revisions. Mahalo for your kol<ua! Helen Higa PDF of Suggested REVISIONS: https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf 286e.pdf 2Page 407 DeVera, Ashley From: Kathy Dorn < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 11:08 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Junk the General Plan Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf I am totally opposed to this General Plan. I am a homeowner. Why is the word "homeowners" never once mentioned?WHO are these stakeholders?What do THEY have a stake in. I'm totally opposed to the UN Agenda 2030 which is tyranny in disguise More below. 1Page 408 DeVera, Ashley From: Rob Lee < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 11:41 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: General Plan Testimony Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Rob Lee Page 409 DeVera, Ashley From: Eugene Elmer < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 1:15 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo, Eugene Elmer https://clicks.aweber.com/y/ct/?l=Ko7Ve&m=3YOa1J131KX887a&b=7fDgKZSyXIJ3p4517GhHEg 1Page 410 DeVera, Ashley From: Bette Phelan < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 3:13 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Bette Phelan https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Sent from my iPad 1Page 411 DeVera, Ashley From: Rick Brienzo < Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 3:32 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Eric Brienzo 1Page 412 DeVera, Ashley From: alicia palmvalleyfarm.com < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 9:23 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Big Island General Plan Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Importance: High Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown out and redone. The current general plan seems to further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing, and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation." We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support, and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and do not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland using the exact same words, such as cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend, and more! How could it be created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Alicia Wills https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf 1Page 413 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 9:02 AM To:Planning General Plan Cc: Stand Together Hawaii Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone.The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper.The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability"when it should be Innovation".We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo, Thomas E Moore Jr 1Page 414 DeVera, Ashley From: Jonathan Pearson < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 9:02 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Please Make Changes Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, Jonathan Pearson Page 415 DeVera, Ashley From: Dea Rackley < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 8:58 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Big Island general plan. "Sustainability" Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Dea Rackley https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Sent from my iPhone 1Page 416 DeVera, Ashley From: Jeff& Gwen < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 8:57 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, 1Page 417 Jeff Stinebrink 2Page 418 DeVera, Ashley From: Krista Barker < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 8:54 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Please Help Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Krista L. Barker, Ph.D., LCSW 1Page 419 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 8:50 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is"Sustainability"when it should be"Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Gwen Stinebrink, Ph.D. 1Page 420 DeVera, Ashley From: Mikial Denker < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 8:25 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: implement revised plan Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony (1).pdf 1Page 421 DeVera, Ashley From: terry Lee < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 7:28 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Hawaii overreach Black.Directly out of General•Ion Red EcitVelem411gblualed is request,texttobe Removed Pink Highlighted a CeneernMernmente Page:27 Implementation StrateglaS 20nilg&Land USe Update regulaliona aNgn with Ibegoals of Ihe General Plan.' Plea.change to,Mdate regulations",align Mb goals of local Communiies ard the General Man." mutual development and voneervaton objeoLvea.' CONCERN:The won,leamecemer,not omenanyenere in theentire Nan.That iaVERY concerning.Why are yau leaving homeowners out elMe general plan that will affect thorn and ruturegeneration,Plenainclude,meowner wherever...IA..31deow.]where uggeuted doLurnenl.Also,payba clearabout.°thew wivate unlilins areMatpm wantto collaborate..enthie lemare transparent Community Engagement Centlmously engage residems and stakeholders in the deC131311- CONCERN:The merging deSenies to kno•i•MO.Stakel101dere.are end EXACTLY Marthey aavestake..Pease define. Pape:28 1.1-me purp0SeS Of the General Plan are to, Provide 1,0framework for regulatory damn, imprnvemant squrelion•traleg a...-.Omani government programs wabin he Countyorganinton and coordinated odilM1Stateand Federal pr>grams. 86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e PD V- Document • 969 Kb Sent from my i Phone Page 422 DeVera, Ashley From: Brant < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 7:05 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo, BRANT PAGE Page 423 DeVera, Ashley From: noreply@konveio.email on behalf of County of Hawaii Planning Department via County of Hawaii Planning Department <noreply@konveio.email> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 2:34 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Form submission from: Contact Us Submitted on Wednesday, September 25, 2024 - 2:34pm Submitted by anonymous user: 72.130.229.244 Submitted values are: location_id: Name: Adriana E Duerr Email: Phone Number: Question or Feedback: I highly oppose the Final Recommended Draft General Plan 2045 which is marching us toward an UN Agenda 30/15-minute city with its clusters and buffer zones and underpinned urgency of debatable climate change. Under this plan, we, the homeowners, are blatantly absent in the decision-making process, being replaced by mysterious stakeholders. Our own family home has been re-designated from low density urban to natural and recreational negating the rights and consent of private property ownership. I'm also outraged that the District of Hilo has never been represented in the CDP process. We too are entitled to our voice and input into our future. I advise more time and review before this plan is adopted. I support the concerns and edits in the enclosed https://docs.google.com/document/d/16sz0Uug8jN3zT MisDzLIW4jBWItEggPOUrf... Mahalo for your consideration. The results of this submission may be viewed at: https://cohplanning.konveio.com/node/12/submission/64 1Page 424 DeVera, Ashley From: ALISSA REESE < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 10:21 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: BIG ISLAND GENERAL PLAN Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo, Alissa Reese iPage 425 DeVera, Ashley From: Aukai Sewell < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 12:40 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: opposition to general plan Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown out and redone. The current general plan seems to further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing, and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability"when it should be "Innovation."We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support, and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and do not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland using the exact same words, such as cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend, and more! How could it be created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Aukai E Sewell 1Page 426 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 2:06 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Testimony to general plan Attachments: Plan edits.pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, Christina Rasmussen Page 427 DeVera, Ashley From: David DeCleene < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 11:55 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here To: Planning Department From: David &Susan DeCleene Re: General Plan We do not see that the General Plan (GP) serves the people of Hawaii Island because: 1) it is largely predicated on a climate theory that has not had broad public discussion to determine whether such a theory meets with the approval of a majority of residents 2) the district of Hilo has been excluded from input-there is no Hilo Community Development Plan. In the first instance, the county, and state, have been building a structure of offices and regulatory directions based upon the theory of climate change, as if the "science is settled". But who determines such an all-encompassing premise? Renowned scientists from around the world have written extensively in opposition. Is it really the place for elected officials to force all residents to live under a theory of their liking? Do we in Hawaii simply accept a 1992 proclamation from the Rio Summit called Agenda 21 as the underpinning of how we plan our lives?Who gave our elected officials, our bureaucrats in county and state departments, such power to shape both the present and the future? In the second instance, the other Big Island districts have CDPs, fashioned over years by committees of citizens, that have informed the GP. Why has the most populous city in the county been excluded?We have sought an answer to this question for a year and a half, without satisfaction. How can we proceed with a GP lacking this input? A GP should reflect the legitimate goals and aspirations of the great majority of residents. That would indicate democracy in action. And more fundamentally, it would indicate the liberty to shape one's life as desired. Putting an already-written GP online and soliciting comments by an extremely small percentage of residents is a failed attempt at input. Where have been the large open townhalls, hosted during hours the bulk of the public can and would attend?With vigorous questions welcomed from residents? It is a fantasy to think the recent workshop at the Arc of Hilo on a Thursday at 4pm, requiring questions to be written down and thus open to manipulation by the emcee, with no follow up questions, ensuring no one be allowed to actually speak directly to the planning committee representatives, to a room of FOURTEEN 14) residents, promotes true input. That is an insult to the very citizens of the Big Island who care deeply about this land. We strongly believe that this GP should be set aside. Perhaps many points can be used in an updated version. But in the interest of true public input, it is imperative that the Big Island be blanketed with lead- up announcements through flyers, radio, online and mainstream media, to gather in residents for 1Page 428 discussions on what we want to see as the guiding document for our lives here. Does it matter that it takes another year? Consider the work done as a first step. Now let democracy begin, and flourish. Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it." Thomas Paine Yours truly, David and Susan DeCleene https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf 2Page 429 DeVera, Ashley From: Daphne Hooper < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 12:22 PM To:Planning General Plan Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/ files/ugd/86fc0c b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Sent from my iPhone 1Page 430 DeVera, Ashley From: Davina < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 5:59 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise General Plan of Big Island Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. With Aloha & Gratitude, Davina Mar Live Aloha d Love Now Rea Pot Page'.27 Implementation Strategies Update reputations to al,with IPe goaN of Ceneral Plan.' Please change.'Update regnlatens tl align path the goals o`local Crrnmuniles erg the LCIPICERIY:The word-Plornemner net oinIten 2282.8r8in the entire Plan.That is VERY concern,%,/,areyau ea.pnghomeowners.,tne generalplanto'wollaffect barnand thee future generatio,Please onclude homeowner Wnereier stakeholder'send nhere euppealed•11818 down..81,0 pleape Le dear about.u Plebe puele unites are thatyuu want.collaborate voth so this is more transparent have slake on Pease define Page 28 I1 TM12 82810385 Of the General Plan are to 1Page 431 86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e 2Page 432 DeVera, Ashley From: Donna < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 10:51 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo Donna Melcher Page 433 DeVera, Ashley From: Deanna Wentworth < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 4:24 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: General Plan Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of our Island, nor is it clearly defining its intentions. It clearly needs revisions. The current general plan is seemingly set up to further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". Although we live in a country that is full of legal toxins we also live in a country with the most cutting edge ideas and innovations for farming and medicine and education and building ect. We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. This general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland in communities just like ours and they use many of the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that this General Plan for The County of Hawaii was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country look and sound the same? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo Nui for your time and consideration. We appreciate you are trying to do a good thing and we have grave concerns about this "Final Draft" and hope you will consider revisions. Sincerely Deanna Wentworth https://clicks.aweber.com/y/ct/?l=G3KFe&m=3YOa1J131KX887a&b=7fDgKZSyXIJ3p4517GhHEg 1Page 434 DeVera, Ashley From: StellaBlue Jewelry < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 3:16 PM To:Planning General Plan Cc: Mitch.D.Roth@hawaiicounty.gov Subject: It's time to Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Now Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island,nor does it clearly define what you want to do.It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public,limit travel,cluster people into dense housing and more.It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is"Sustainability"when it should be"Innovation".We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over- regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like:cluster,stakeholder, buffer zones,change codes,amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Estelle Birch https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/ files/ugd/86fc0c b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf n May all beings be peaceful. May all beings be happy.n Page 435 DeVera, Ashley From: Elena Sims < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 10:23 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii county General Plan Testemony here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/ files/ugd/86fc0c b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Sent from my iPhone 1Page 436 DeVera, Ashley From: Fran Copp < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 11:29 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Re Hawaii plan for 2030 Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? What I wonder is why this plan wasn't set up as a workshop for the community members to create their own plan to showcase the unique aina and members of the community. Our community should not look like every other community. Please consider revisions as stated below. Fran Copp 1Page 437 DeVera, Ashley From: fred hofer < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 1:45 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii island general plan, severly Attachments: Big_Island_General_Plan_2045_Testimony_-1 ( 1).pdf; Big_Island_General_Plan_2045 Testimony_-1 (1).pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. We need composting facilities, not landfills Worm farms (composting facilities) not more landfills, surely NO burning of "trash" The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". Sustainability is just a label you put on things that are definitely NOT sustainable, as burning of trash, or biomass, that's insane, not sustainable Same with renewable energy-you slap that label onto dangerous fracking facilities, as "geothermal ventures". That's fracking. Not sustainable, not renewable We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. Support family farms, farms, that just sustain their own ohana, that do not sell anything- support these! Stop rezoning ag land into residential!! The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! 1Page 438 How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Seems it was not so much created -- but copied, as it surveys the oligarchy, not the residents of Hawaii, for sure Nor the lands, or waters, forests or mountains Take a look at Samoa, model the fishing rules after Samoa, their waters and reefs now thrive Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo nui loa a Fred Hofer Hilo, Hawaii 2Page 439 DeVera, Ashley From: apurvolove9 < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 7:37 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. this is not for we the people.... The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo fern taryn sutherland https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Page 440 DeVera, Ashley From: Veronique Leferink < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 11:58 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: General Plan Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, Henrica Leferink iPage 441 DeVera, Ashley From: Leslie M < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 9:43 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Big Island General Plan Comments Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, We agree with the following comments: The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Thank you, James & Leslie Miles 1Page 442 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 1:30 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revised Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Importance: High Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, Joni Glynn Page 443 DeVera, Ashley From: Juhl Rayne < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 5:14 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony here Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Juhl Rayne PDF here: https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/ files/ugd/86fc0c b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Virus-free.www.avg.com 1Page 444 DeVera, Ashley From: Kathy Hasselbring < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 12:39 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony (1).pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, Kathy Hasselbring 1Page 445 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 12:14 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Kami https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf Sent from my iPhone 1Page 446 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 10:25 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department I'm registering a protest as a comment about The General Plan 2045. I have taken time to review the entire document and I have reached the conclusion that this entire document reflects a flawed process and a failure to genuinely and effectively consult with the public and to reflect the genuine and real concerns and needs of Island residents. This document looks eerily like many of the policy talking points of foreign non-governmental agencies (WEF, Council of Foreign Relations). This document does not express value for 'aina, for ohana and community and respect. This document reflects a mindset that would clearly erase private property in favor of a communist agenda of property seizure and acquistions. This document openly proposed that our travel be limited which is a violation of the US. Constitution There was no community consultation and no community support for much of the 'rezoning' that is being proposed. This is maladministration and a fraud. The justification for limits on freedom to travel, on property acquisition and for transforming our rural agricultural island into the location for multiple 'urban density' settlements is 'Climate Change' which is cited in the document in just about every section. There is no data provided in the Plan to support assertions of a 'Climate Emergency.' Americans are currently seeing the 'carbon narrative'justify the same radical agendas of property appropriation and confinement expressed in 'Community Plan' documents across the country. Many are pointing out that policies being handed down to them strangely'exactly' reflect the goals of globalist organizations such as United Nations, World Economic Forum and Council of Foreign Affairs 1) Primarily the failure of the Planning Department to include a Hilo Community Plan is such a glaring omission that this General Plan should not proceed until that process is completed to the satisfaction of the Hilo community. 2) Further I have a more general objection that this document lacks reference to our economy and lacks a focus on how the economy can be supported. This omission defies logic and reflects a flawed set of administrative goals and objectives for this entire exercise. Page 447 3) I'm also stating my objection that this document clearly doesn't reflect a consultation with communities on the island created for their benefit and for a future generation to anticipate growth and prosperity. Many of the challenges we currently experience are absent from this plan. We are a primarily rural island with a vast and under-utilized potential in our agricultural sector and yet this document appears to be heavily slanted toward urban density housing development. No explanation is provided as to 'why' this is a driving value in this document (but again, pointing out that the proposals for urban density, cluster housing is also the basis for SMART city design and for 15 minute cities built on a premise of monitoring carbon and limiting the freedom to travel) 4) A truly useful planning document would be addressing the need for growth in the agriculture sector but instead we see references to acquistion of private land for the purposes of 'buffer zones' and we see intentions to legislate what farming activities will be 'permitted' on privately owned agricultural lands. These kinds of proposals reek of socialism and inappropriate levels of control. They most certainly don't reflect concerns or demands of our island communities. 5) Instead of references to plans for economic growth we See multiple references in this General Plan to measures that will result accumulation of debt via 'public private partnerships' to finance infrastructure investments (for development projects) and we see suggestions that the island's future will see increased welfare programs. 6) Very concerning are the repeated references to incentives and measures designed to 'limit' vehicular travel since this is a clear and stated intention to violate constitutional rights of every individual to travel freely without interference. 7) To justify measures such as 'limiting' the vehicular travel we see references to 'climate change' which has specifically been challenged as a 'theory.' Carbon modeling has been identified as flawed by over one thousand scientists and 8)Yet one more unconstitutional overreach in this document has to do with interference with property rights. There are people reviewing this plan and discovering that their home is rezoned from residential to 'recreation and conservation.' Many of the public are still unaware of the changes in zoning and they were never informed or consulted ahead of the change in zoning. That designation is referenced in documents from 'Council of Foreign Relations' who originally created Agenda 2021 . This has since been adopted and refined by World Economic Forum and the main objective is to relocate 'human settlement' patterns into high density 'cluster' patterns and to remove humans from areas that are to be designated as 'wild lands.' That our County of Hawaii Planning Department would attempt to rezone property without consultation or engagement with legislature amounts to such gross interference with property rights as to be considered by many as fraud and financial crime. There doesn't seem to be a 'nicer' way to express how serious this appears to be. Again, rezoning private property zero reflects the concerns of our island residents that were expressed at any time during the public consultation process. . 9) A significant objection is that instead of providing a plan for economic growth and sound development, this document reads as a plan for massive levels of development without explanation or context. Which population will be taking up all of the urban development alluded to in this document ? Where is the plan to support the current residents of the island to prosper and flourish? If no economic plan then why and how would it make sense to significantly replace the population? 2Page 448 In addition to objections about the absence of community directives in the plan, there have been multiple flaws in the consultation process on a more technical level. Since last year I was aware of complaints from members of the public seeking to participate that the website platform used for comments and review had glitches and was experienced by those attempting to use it as cumbersome. I understand that there were even reports of the document failing to load correctly and maps being difficult to view. Most telling perhaps out of all the failures in the actual consultation process is that many of the meetings have been held without sufficient public engagement. One such recent 'final consultation' for the Hilo Community was hosted by your administration in a rented event space at 2pm on a Thursday. I've rarely seen a more disengenuous attempt to meet with community than hosting a meeting at that time of day. Unsurprisingly a little over a dozen people attended at that time on a weekday. In addition to the ridiculous time that this event was hosted, a complaint I am aware of is that at that public event, questions were not taken from the floor but were required to be 'submitted in writing' whereupon administrative officers read the questions aloud and in the process edited and omitted parts of the question. These are sadly strategies that are sometimes used during a public consultation to create the appearance of public consent where none exists. I believe that there should be some shame felt by all involved that so much time and financial resources as well as community trust has been lost due to some kind of strange 'copy paste' exercise where we see foreign jargon and foreign value systems imposed. There isn't a nicer way to say it and it is urgent that the Planning Department abandon attempts to say that this consultation process has been legitimate. Such failures as listed here may yet become the subject of litigation particularly when the public is learning that this document contains multiple pathways to legislate property seizure and that zoning of properties has occurred without prior consultation with the property owners concerned. I am attaching a PDF document with notations concerning the most grievous errors in the document. Myself and other community members have reviewed the General Plan and are citing the need for extensive edits. I would say that in my final evaluation however that the process is clearly so flawed, ethically, legally and from the point of view of the technical aspects of the platforms used that it should be scrapped and begun again once a thorough investigation is made. I will be forwarding these concerns to the County Council immediately. Please acknowledge receipt of this letter. Yours sincerely, Mahalo Megan Isaac Hilo Resident 3Page 449 DeVera, Ashley From: NANCY THORNES < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 10:33 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony (1).pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo nancy Thornes Page 450 DeVera, Ashley From: White Lotus < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 11:27 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo, Olivia 1Page 451 DeVera, Ashley From: PATRICK WAKE < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 2:07 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Testimony/ Revision of Hawaii General Plan needed Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of the Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown out and redone. The current plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It lacks a conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is sustainability when it should be innovation. Your general plan seems to be a copy model throughout the country. We don't need the Mainland deciding how we live here. Please review the attached PFD and revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo Patrick Wake https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/ files/ugd/86fc0c b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf iPage 452 DeVera, Ashley From: Rosey < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 10:59 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony -2.pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Rosey Silverstein 1Page 453 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 12:11 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: This bad Plan Attachments: WebPage.pdf https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207 bf286e.pdf 1Page 454 DeVera, Ashley From: Vicki Vierra < Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 4:59 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Big Island General Plan Testimony Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf 1Page 455 DeVera, Ashley From: Dan and Shannon Fisher < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 8:44 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Dan and Shannon Fisher Page 456 DeVera, Ashley From: Rogers < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 9:30 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony - Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Lori Rogers Sent with Proton Mail secure email. Page 457 DeVera, Ashley From: marybeth weber < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 8: 12 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii County General Plan Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. Anyone who accepts this plan does not have the best interests of the people of Hawaii. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Marybeth Weber Page 458 DeVera, Ashley From: Nana Manuel < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 8:09 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The "one size fits all" approach to planning for the future does not "fit" on Big Island. Please do not allow the legacy of this administration and this Planning Department to be such a dystopian and flawed document with such long reaching consequences. The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, Nana-Honua Manuel Volcano,Hawaii 1Page 459 DeVera, Ashley From: shaylene fahey < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 9:24 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: ReviseHawaiiGeneralPlanTestimony AlohA Planning Department, Please see the following changes to your Plan for Big Islandhttps://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e. pdf I HIGHLY OPPOSE Of your original plan as it will be detrimental to the people of the state of Hawaii! You are elected representatives and you are Not representing the population properly! Bringing the United Nations into the United States of America will be HORRENDOUS!!! Stop this Nonsense NOW! Shaylene Fahey Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 1Page 460 DeVera, Ashley From: Adriana Duerr < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 1:51 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Aloha Planning Department, I have read the entire final draft of the Big Island General Plan. I strongly suggest the plan be revised if not completely thrown out and redone. Attached is a PDF for your consideration. As is, this plan certainly does not support the future I'd like for the Big Island, nor does it clearly define what and how you want to implement it. The whole thing seems predicated on the debatable precept of climate emergency. Your present draft appears to regulate and fine us citizens into restricted travel and property access while clustering us into dense housing and more. It fails at providing a map to help communities prosper. It appears the primary structure of this plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". Let's move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while trying to control and over-regulate them. Similar general plans have been modeled throughout the world with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more. It begs me to ask you who sponsored this global plan and paid for its creation? How will this plan be funded and by whom? I am skeptical of the use of public/private partnerships where local decisions are made by unelected bodies, especially those from away. Does "government" refer to Hawaii County? If it doesn't, it should. Why isn't there any mention of property owners? It seems our rights to own property are being blatantly ignored and violated. This draft's future land use map has our family home and that of our Pali neighbors re-zoned from low density urban to natural and recreation. What will this do to the value of our property? No where is there mention of compensation. Zoning must be updated in certain areas to reflect shifting trends and land use preferences." Whose desires and who is deciding? Does this include property owners? Page 461 Let's work to create a plan that is not an ICLEI /Agenda 30 cookie cutter, imposed from above by a global entity, but one from the people who live here, one that supports the never mentioned homeowners, and not just the mysterious stakeholders. I am also disturbed that the District of Hilo was not represented in the Community Development Planning process. The population center of the Big Island deserves to have a voice. Mahalo for considering my concerns and reservations, Adriana E. Duerr 86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e Sent from my iPhone 2Page 462 DeVera, Ashley From: Tutu Barb < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 7:35 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: FW: General Plan Attachments: Gerenal Plan.pdf; Letter General Plan Barbara.pdf Sent from Mail for Windows From:Jan Bolton Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2024 6:59 PM To: Subject: General Plan iPage 463 1*-))6,t re, b2 )4)-t September 26,2024 Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo EMh41— Page 464 DeVera, Ashley From: Dan Bolton < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 3:58 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Fw: General Plan Attachments: Gerenal Plan.pdf; Letter General Plan.pdf 1Page 465 Daniel Bolton Mailing address: Home address: September 26, 2024 Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the gen.(.1 plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Page 466 DeVera, Ashley From: Elsa Dedman < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 2:23 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: General Plan Final Draft 2045 _ E. Dedman Testimony Submission Attachments: County of Hawaii General Plan 2045_26Sep2024_E. Dedman Testimony_signed.pdf; Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Please see attached Letter and PDF of Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony. Mahalo nui loa, Elsa Kalanikauleleiaiwi Dedman 1Page 467 Elsa Kalanikauleleiaiwi Dedman 26 September 2024 General Plan 2045 County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 RE: Written Testimony of Elsa Kalanikauleleiaiwi Dedman—General Plan final recommended draft dated July 2024: Submission to GeneralPlan@hawaiicounty.gov I have reviewed the attached PDF and in agreement with the comments, proposed changes to the General Plan. This Moku o Keawe regulations must be for the people and by the people. The People's rights and well-being must be in front of the acquisition of money. Mahalo for your consideration and please understand I am not in support of this General Plan the way it is formatted and presented. Respectfully Submitted, Elsa Kalanikauleleiaiwi Dedman Page 468 DeVera, Ashley From: Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:19 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Feedback on General Plan Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is"Sustainability"when it should be"Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo, Guy Nicholson Guy Nicholson 1Page 469 DeVera, Ashley From: Heidi White < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:30 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Oppose Present Hawaii General PIan2024 - Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony.pdf Aloha Planning Department, I oppose the County of Hawaii General Plan of 2024. The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Heidi White, Realtor (S)-57643 At Home On The Big Island, Hawaii 1Page 470 DeVera, Ashley From: Jan Bolton < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 3:59 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Fw: General Plan Attachments: Gerenal Plan.pdf; Letter General Plan.pdf Jan Page 471 Janet Bolton Home address: September 26, 2024 Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Page 472 DeVera, Ashley From: JOE SOMMER < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 1:45 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: BI General Plan Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone despite it accomplishing exactly what you want it to. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. Despite this being the actual plan, it is wrong and you know this. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. Although, I understand that is what you really want. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! This is done on purpose. How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? I.E. we know... You lie Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. We don't want the same thing you want. Tons of Mahalo, Joe Page 473 DeVera, Ashley From: John S < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:52 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Hawaii General plan testimony Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Greetings Planning Department, As a property owner on the Hamakau coast, I have several major concerns about the final draft of the Big Island general plan. I want to see it changed. In its current state I believe that what is proposed does not support what the people who actually live here full time want for now or the future. It should be revised.. The current general plan appears to regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want thriving communities, not mere sustainability which is an over-used word. We want environmental support and economic alternatives so that homeowners can thrive and live a healthy prosperous life, not be put into boxes and smart cities. I have deep concerns about the general plan you have modeled since throughout the United States/Mainland the exact same words are used such as: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! Every county or island has its own unique challenges as we seek to thrive. It is quite strange that this was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language. We need our own plan! Kindly review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Sincerely John Stern Page 474 DeVera, Ashley From: Rockwell Seaman < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 8:24 PM To:Planning General Plan Cc: Rockwell Seaman; Angie Merola; T Brede Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Rockwell Seaman) 1Page 475 DeVera, Ashley From: Remy Williams < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 3:22 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Big Island General Plan Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Dear Planning Department, The Big Island general plan doesn't appear to totally support the best interests of the people. Additionally, some sections of the plan seem vague and need to be more definitive. I have concerns about the current general plan as it appears it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. Also, it appears there is no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. Sustainability is a given but we need to also think Innovation. We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. This general plan that you have drafted is similar to what's used throughout the USA/mainland and uses the exact same wording, i.e., cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more. The Big Island is different. How is it possible that the plan was created by the Planning Department for the Big Island, when so many other general plans nationwide use the same wording? Our island is very unique and special with vast differences compared to other states on the mainland and even compared to Oahu. The Big Island general plan should reflect this. Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Thank you for your dedication and commitment to the people of the Big Island and for having our best interests in mind...for us, our ohanas and our future generations. Mahalo, R. Williams Page 476 DeVera, Ashley From: Sharman O'Shea < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 3:47 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Aloha Planning Department; The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Sharman O'Shea https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf 1Page 477 DeVera, Ashley From: Tariq Aboufakhr < Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:16 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, I am a resident, Although I don't agree fully,this woman has made some good points you should look into regarding the Hawaii General Plan. 1Page 478 DeVera, Ashley From: Cindy Tompkins < Sent: Friday, September 27, 2024 9:38 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise Hawaii General Plan Testimony Here Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is Sustainability" when it should be "Innovation". We want to move toward thriving communities, environmental support and economic alternatives that support farmers and homeowners and not put people in boxes while over-regulating them. The general plan you have is modeled throughout the United States/Mainland with the exact same words like: cluster, stakeholder, buffer zones, change codes, amend and more! How is it possible that it was created by the Big Island Planning Department when so many other General Plans around the country have the same language? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Mahalo Cindy Tompkins 1Page 479 DeVera, Ashley From: Lisa Binder < Sent: Friday, September 27, 2024 3:57 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Keep Hawaii for the people, not shareholders Attachments: WebPage.pdf https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207 bf286e.pdf 1Page 480 DeVera, Ashley From: mardi strong < Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2024 5:51 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: My thoughts https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/_files/ugd/86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf I hope this works. I know I fill this out earlier. Get Outlook for iOS 1Page 481 DeVera, Ashley From: Rebecca Melendez < Sent: Saturday, October 5, 2024 11:53 AM To:Council Testimony; Planning General Plan; Planning Internet Mail; Roy, Alex; Villegas, Rebecca; Kimball, Heather; Kagiwada, Jennifer; Lee Loy, Sue; Kierkiewicz, Ashley; Kanealii-Kleinfelder, Matt; Galimba, Michelle M.; Inaba, Holeka; Evans, Cynthia F.W.; repaiu@capitol.hawaii.gov; repalcos@capitol.hawaii.gov; repamato@capitol.hawaii.gov; repbelatti@capitol.hawaii.gov; repchun@capitol.hawaii.gov; repcochran@capitol.hawaii.gov; repevslin@capitol.hawaii.gov; repganaden@capitol.hawaii.gov; repgarcia@capitol.hawaii.gov; repgarrett@capitol.hawaii.gov; repgates@capitol.hawaii.gov; rephashem@capitol.hawaii.gov; repholt@capitol.hawaii.gov; rephusseyburdick@capitol.hawaii.gov; repichiyama@capitol.hawaii.gov; repilagan@capitol.hawaii.gov; repkahaloa@capitol.hawaii.gov; repkapela@capitol.hawaii.gov; repkila@capitol.hawaii.gov; repkitagawa@capitol.hawaii.gov; repkobayashi@capitol.hawaii.gov; repkong@capitol.hawaii.gov; replachica@capitol.hawaii.gov; replamosao@capitol.hawaii.gov; replowen@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmarten@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmartinez@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmatayoshi@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmatsumoto@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmiyake@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmmizuno@capitol.hawaii.gov; repmorikawa@capitol.hawaii.gov; repnakamura@capitol.hawaii.gov; repnakashima@capitol.hawaii.gov; repnishimoto@capitol.hawaii.gov; reponishi@capitol.hawaii.gov; repperruso@capitol.hawaii.gov; reppierick@capitol.hawaii.gov; reppoepoe@capitol.hawaii.gov; repquinlan@capitol.hawaii.gov; repsaiki@capitol.hawaii.gov; repsayama@capitol.hawaii.gov; repsouza@capitol.hawaii.gov; reptakayama@capitol.hawaii.gov; reptakenouchi@capitol.hawaii.gov; reptam@capitol.hawaii.gov; reptarnas@capitol.hawaii.gov; reptodd@capitol.hawaii.gov; repward@capitol.hawaii.gov; repwoodson@capitol.hawaii.gov; repyamashita@capitol.hawaii.gov Subject: Hawaii Planning General Plan Can Take Private Land Away and Goes Against Our Rights Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony (1).pdf Aloha County Council and Hawai'i Planning, It is a very sensitive time,with a lot of fear right now because of wars and uncertainty and this General Plan NEEDS to be revised. This General Plan is giving Hawai'i Planning the right to incorporate private lands into their Open Space Network, and it is giving the Hawai'i Planning Director more power when the final say should always stay with the county council because you are our checks and balances and the community can give their testimonies with you. Page 482 This General Plan seriously needs to be revised to protect private lands and keep our communities RIGHTS safe, because we are homeowners, landowners and renters and the wording in this General Plan is giving the Hawai'i Planning Department the RIGHT to take private land away, page 111 17.4. I have attached a PDF testimony and you might not agree with all of the PDF testimony I have attached and it is trying to protect private lands and the communities RIGHTS before they can be FREELY taken away through this General Plan. My point: Page 41 1.13 it reads 1.13 "Incentivize private land management practices that protect and enhance natural resource and values without further regulations or fines. and, when appropriate, pursue the acquisition of lands for the protection of natural resources." Hawai'i state can already take people's lands for state reasons. This sentence does NOT make it clear what "private lands" they are talking about, nor do they clearly say what kinds of lands they will have the RIGHT to be able to "acquisition". We DO NOT need Hawai'i Planning to have rights to take people's land away like the state can. They need to edit this and declare what lands they are talking about. On page 47 under Action, they clearly state what land they are talking about in "4.i Assess and prioritize County-owned lands..." This is how they should clearly talk about lands in all their statements because this is an extremely sensitive topic, and NO COMMUNITY MEMBER WOULD AGREE WITH GIVING HAWAI'I PLANNING THE RIGHT TO TAKE PRIVATE LANDS AWAY. Page 48 Policies 5.c Develop a process for reviewing and revising guidelines for designating Natural Beauty Sites They need to add without invasion of current resident areas or local farms. 5.d Establish a Scenic Resources Protection Program to identify, inventory, and protect areas of significant beauty. The program could include recommendations from the Scenic Resources Inventory and Mapping Project(2016) They need to add without invasion of current resident areas or local farms Page 81 11.d Amend the Zoning Code to allow for PUD to become administrative permits and subject to the approval of the Planning Director. They are trying to give the Planning Director more power here and the power needs to stay with the county council. Page 85 Lands to be kept in a largely natural state with minimal facilities consistent with open space uses along with agricultural land uses. Includes areas vulnerable to natural hazards, steep slopes, lava fields, and areas set aside 2Page 483 for cultural and/or natural resource preservation purposes that are not necessarily under active management. Dwelling density on agriculture zoning up to 1 unit per acre. Whose lands are they talking about that they want to keep "in a largely natural state with minimal facilities consistent with open space..."? Page 85 Lands that are not capable of producing sustained, high agricultural yields without the intensive application of modern farming methods and technologies due to certain physical constraints such as soil composition, slope, tillable by machine, and climate. These lands are better suited for other less intensive agricultural uses such as grazing and pasture and can support additional residential densities when situated near UGAs. Dwelling density up to 1 unit per acre, although additional may be allow with permitted additional farm dwellings. Does this paragraph mean Hawai'i Planning can tell farmers what their "lands are better suited for"? This needs to be revised to be extremely clear. Page 111 17.4 Land use applications shall identify as early as possible any existing or potential active living corridors that should be incorporated into the County's open space network. Are they saying they will have the power to incorporate private land if they feel it has an "active living corridor" during a land use application? Because this is what it sounds like it is saying and it is NOT right to give the Hawai'i Planning Department the RIGHT to be able to "incorporate" private land into the County's open space network if they decide. Private land is private land. and Hawai'i Planning shouldn't have the RIGHT to take private land and incorporate as they see fit. This sentence NEEDS to be revised. Page 112 Mountain For all zone districts As determined by the director to provide reasonable means to access public trail sections and public facilities Again they are trying to give more power to the Planning Director,please reject. These are only a few items that need serious revision. Please see the PDF I have attached and read this General Plan thoroughly because it is giving the Hawai'i Planning Department the power to take private lands away and they should have this right. It also gives the Hawai'i Planning Director more power than he should have. This General Plan is also extremely vague at times that it could mean multiple things. They need to revise this General Plan and make it extremely clear. Please, reject this General Plan for these reasons. Thank you, Sincerely, 3Page 484 Rebecca Mel endez 4Page 485 DeVera, Ashley From: Eileen Downing < Sent: Sunday, October 6, 2024 5: 11 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise or Redo the Hawaii General Plan! Attachments: BiglslandGeneralPlan2045Testimony 1.pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Eileen Downing Page 486 DeVera, Ashley From: Judith Hartmann < Sent: Sunday, October 6, 2024 11:33 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise or Redo the Hawaii General Plan! Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Judith Hartmann Page 487 DeVera, Ashley From: Rob Lee < Sent: Sunday, October 6, 2024 3:40 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Subject line: Revise or Redo the Hawaii General Plan! Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony v2.pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo. Rob Lee Rob Lee Page 488 DeVera, Ashley From: Hello ... < Sent: Sunday, October 6, 2024 7:47 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise or Redo the Hawaii General Plan Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Yelaw HIghliglted isrequesting teal to be Removed Page.27 Implementation etrategiea iJr,dele regUlallOnS le aligt YAM/re goat3 Or Me Genera Plan.' Please awe to.'Update regulakil,to"align roth I,goals orlocal Communkies and.. CONCERN:The word'Homeowner ie net written anyuhara irhe entre is VERY 9oncemolg.Whyareypuleayirtp hornecxnem out ofhe general plan will affectthemend ther fUture generatoni%Please include'homeowner xterever"'stakeholder'sandMere suggesled inIbis document Also.please be clear...outv,,othese private entlies are hat you malu„process CONCERN:Ilecemmuni,deascres tokrowvto"Stakeholders'.arsandENACT,.0 they have slake P define. Page-28 Federal programs. 86fc0c_b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e Much Mahalo Yuki Klahr Page 489 DeVera, Ashley From: Krista Barker < Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 1:51 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise or Redo the Hawaii General Plan! Attachments: Big Island General Plan 2045 Testimony .pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Krista L. Barker, Ph.D., LCSW Page 490 DeVera, Ashley From: Sara Steiner < Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 8:04 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Junk the Hawaii General Plan or revise it to support the RESIDENTS Attachments: Changes for General Plan.pdf The General Plan is hundreds of pages of NOTHING SPECIFIC. Looks like the New World Order to me. I can't even see where it shows homeowners or talks about their rights. The plan is about removing locals from the picture, taking land unilaterally and it does not give deference to the residents at all. It is using climate change to take away our land and freedoms. It talks about compliance and rules and ordinances -which means more laws and fines for the people. I support the attached changes recommended by Stand Together Hawaii. Sara Steiner 1Page 491 DeVera, Ashley From: Terri Yoshinaga < Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 3:20 PM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise or Redo the Hawaii General Plan! Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Terri Yoshinaga https://www.standtogetherhawaii.com/ files/ugd/86fc0c b34739e4c99c461685de4c0207bf286e.pdf iPage 492 DeVera, Ashley From: Eugene Elmer < Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 8:49 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise or redo the Hawaii County General Plan The final draft of the Big Island General Plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Eugene Elmer https://clicks.aweber.com/y/ct/?l=Ko7Ve&m=3eRihvsSgaX887a&b=aobTlvQVEWM RFsrFYhOohA Page 493 DeVera, Ashley From: fred hofer < Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 7:38 AM To:Planning General Plan Subject: Revise or redo big island general plan Attachments: Big_Island_General_Plan_2045_Testimony_.pdf Aloha Planning Department, The final draft of the Big Island general plan does not support the future of Big Island, nor does it clearly define what you want to do. It should be revised or thrown-out and redone. The current general plan looks like it will further regulate and fine the public, limit travel, cluster people into dense housing and more. It has no conclusive plan to help communities prosper. The main structure of the plan is "Sustainability," which is a "woke" word and creates a lot of concern about who will decide what is sustainable and will it create government overreach? Please review the attached PDF and revise the general plan accordingly. Much Mahalo Fred Hofer Hilo 1Page 494 Legend: Black: Directly out of General Plan Red: Edit Yellow Highlighted is requesting text to be Removed Pink Highlighted is a Concern/Comments Page: 27 Implementation Strategies Zoning & Land Use Regulations Update regulations to align with the goals of the General Plan." Please change to: "Update regulations" to "align with the goals of local Communities and the General Plan." Public-Private Partnerships Collaborate with private entities and homeowners to achieve mutual development and conservation objectives." CONCERN: The word "Homeowner" is not written anywhere in the entire plan. That is VERY concerning. Why are you leaving homeowners out of the general plan that will affect them and their future generations? Please include "homeowner" wherever"stakeholder" is and where suggested in this document. Also, please be clear about who these private entities are that you want to collaborate with so this is more transparent. Community Engagement Continuously engage residents and stakeholders in the decision- making process." CONCERN: The community deserves to know who "Stakeholders" are and EXACTLY what they have stake in. Please define. Page: 28 1.1 The purposes of the General Plan are to: Provide the framework for regulatory decisions, capital improvement priorities, acquisition strategies, and other pertinent government programs within the County organization and coordinated with State and Federal programs. Page 495 This sounds like you want to take people's property through acquisition and regulate the heck out of locals. Please change to the following: Provide framework that supports local farmers and communities without further regulations, capital improvement priorities, and other pertinent local and government programs within the County organization and coordinate with State and Federal programs to support thriving communities. Promote and safeguard the public interest and the interest of the County as a whole." Please change to the following: ""Promote and safeguard the public interest and the interest of the County as a whole without violating personal freedoms, the Constitution or further regulating the public." Effect political and technical coordination in community improvement and development." CONCERN: This sounds like you will bring politics into community living. That is not pono. Please change to: "Effect strategies that support community improvements and development for locals." The 2045 General Plan is the primary policy document for county agencies, planning commissions, elected officials, landowners, developers, and citizens to guide land use policy decisions for the Island of Hawaii." Please change to: The 2045 General Plan is the primary policy document for county agencies, planning commissions, elected officials, landowners, homeowners, developers, and locals to guide land use policy decisions for the Island of Hawaii. Please add: (a) The general plan shall contain a statement of development objectives, standards and principles with respect to the most desirable use of land within the county for residential, recreational, agricultural, commercial, industrial and other purposes which shall be consistent with proper conservation of natural resources without violating personal rights and freedoms, and supporting local communities to prosper, and the preservation of our natural beauty and historical sites, while still giving access to the public; the most desirable density of population in the several parts of the county (Remove) b) The council shall enact zoning, subdivision, and such other ordinances which shall contain the necessary provisions to support thriving communities, farmers and homeowners. The way it is currently written describes zoning people out of their homes with more regulations and fines. Page 496 Page 29: d) Amendments to the general plan may be initiated by the council or the planning director giving adequate notice to the public for needed testimony. Page 32: CONCERN WITH THE THREE CIRCLE "SUSTAINABILITY" DIAGRAM: The words: Sustainability and Equity are part of a political woke vocabulary and should not be in the Hawaii General Plan. Also, "Social and Culture Equity" should be removed. It is not the responsibility of the planning department to control the behavior of people. That again is a "woke" agenda. Nor does this language reflect a thriving community. "Environmental Protection" gives the impression of more regulations and a reduction of people's rights. Please remove it. Instead call it: INNOVATION with these 3 circles: Economic Alternatives, Environmental Support, Thriving Communities The goal of the planning department should be to create an environment of prosperity and not one of over regulation and constraints on locals. We can do those through new innovations and not sustainability. Sustainability moves Big Island backwards not forward! 1.4 Innovation Principles and Practices CONCERN: Big Island needs to move toward free energy, which is available and not more regulations on what we have. Change: Integrating innovation into the General Plan is crucial for fostering long-term resilience and thriving communities. Change: "This includes increasing the effectiveness of new technologies to support local communities, improving coordination among various agencies and levels of government, and finding new and innovative ways to support our natural and cultural resources. for better development that supports a thriving environment, economic alternatives (sharing without taxes, trading without regulation), and flourishing communities. The General Plan recognizes this need and aligns with the Hawaii 2050 Sustainability Plan,, which sets a strategic framework for achieving a sustainable future. By embedding sustainability principles into its core, this Plan sets forth a cohesive and forward-thinking strategy that addresses key challenges and anticipates future needs." Please remove what is highlighted! Page 497 CONCERN: By using the word "Sustainable" you are not supporting Hawaii to move forward. You are creating more control of the environment, and communities. That is not Pono and violates the HS [§5-7.5] "Aloha Spirit": "Aloha"means mutual regard and affection and extends warmth in caring with no obligation in return. If the planning department creates a general plan that adds more regulations and constraints on locals, they violate the Aloha Spirit law. The Hawaii 2050 Innovation Plan "created the State's first definition of sustainability" (remove): A Hawaii that achieves the following: 1. Respects the culture, character, beauty, and history of our state's island communities; 2. Support a thriving community both socially and economically as we support our environment to heal and prosper; and 3. Meets the needs of the present without violating freedoms or compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Page 33: In the diagram: Regulatory Measures" County Code Administrative Rules Permits This shows that this general plan will increase restrictions and fees on farmers and other locals. This is not Pono. The plan should reflect innovation not constraints against the population. Please change to CHANGE TO: Innovation Practices" Implement new resources Administration support Economic Alternatives Remove "permits". Stop trying to permit the population to death! Page 498 CURRENTLY: The Plan also incorporates guidelines to serve as strategic directions and standards to inform decisions regarding topics such as land use, infrastructure, housing, and resource management. These guidelines help to ensure consistency in planning and implementation, promoting sustainable growth, environmental stewardship, and community well-being. (This is a complete overreach of the government. You cannot tell people what to do with their property! It is NOT the responsibility of the planning department to ensure people's well-being! This should be revised to support environment, innovations, and thriving communities.) Vision: The ability to plan for the future with creativity and innovation in support of thriving communities. Goal: To see Hawaii Island become self-sustaining as communities and the environment prosper Objective: Measurable, achievable, and time-bound milestones toward achieving a goal. Guideline: A stated course of action that shall take precedence when addressing areas of concern and should be followed, unless a determination is made that it is not the most desirable in a particular case; thus, a guideline may be deviated from without penalty or sanction as long2 as it supports thriving communities, economic alternatives and supporting the environment. Page 34 Regulatory Implementing Actions (Locals DO NOT need more regulations and hoops to jump through. That will not support thriving communities.) Regulatory implementing actions are one of two types of approaches used in the General Plan to pursue the vision, goals, and objectives. Regulatory actions are controlling in that they define boundaries, development parameters, and measures intended to implement goals or objectives. The three regulatory implementing actions in the Plan include: Please change the last paragraph to: Work with local communities to pursue the vision, goals, and objectives. Find fair and supportive directions to define boundaries, development parameters, and measures intended to implement goals or objectives. Three actions in the Plan include: Page 499 General Plan Land Use Map: A map that graphically delineates the areas of intended future land use types that support thriving communities and environmental support and do not hinder personal freedoms. Policy: A general rule for action focused on a specific issue, derived from more general goals3that also support thriving communities and supporting the environment. Standard: A supportive measure that defines the meaning, quality, or quantity of a policy by providing a way to measure its attainment. In the General Plan, future land use maps, policies, and standards are specific to the actions through which zoning ordinances, subdivisions, and public improvements or projects are initiated or adopted through innovations and are flexible to support thriving communities. because, as they must conform to and implement the general plan in accordance with the County Charter, Section 3-15." Remove! The word "conform" is concerning. We are not in Communist China. Please revise to support thriving communities. Non-regulatory implementing actions typically involve community engagement, education and outreach, partnership development, and resource allocation to encourage support from the community (remove "compliance") and proactive efforts. This approach allows for flexibility and innovation in achieving the Plan's vision. Throughout the General Plan, the objectives and policies are followed by a set of implementing actions. There are three types: Add: Community Support: Taking testimony and revisions from the community seriously and implementing where possible. Page 35: 1 . 6 Grounded Vision and Goals As we navigate our future, maintaining a balance between economic alternatives, environmental support, and thriving communities is paramount. By integrating those established values and principles, the General Plan ensures continuity and reflects the collective vision of Hawaii Island residents, guiding new innovation developments while honoring our unique cultural and environmental heritage. Page 500 The four primary chapters of the Plan encompass the innovation pillars of environment, community, and economy, as outlined in the Hawaii State Planning Act Goals. General Plan Vision Statement Hawaii Island is an exemplary leader with healthy and resilient communities that are built by innovative developments, a thriving and diversified local economy, and collaborative biocultural stewardship with locals. Goal General Plan Chapter Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship Natural and cultural resources are thriving and sustainably managed, preserved, and restored to maintain our unique and diverse environment and use innovative techniques if and when appropriate to support future growth. Addressing Climate Change for Ensure the science is followed and Island-Wide Health investigate credentialed scientists and the Milankovitch cycles of which both have CONCERN: Please realize there is no shown the earth is cooling. Since humans climate change emergency. 1944 have less than 1% impact on climate, start supporting ways that we can maintain a credentialed scientists from around the healthy island by incorporating policies, world have signed a "No Climate Change programs, infrastructure, and decision-making that support the environment Emergency Declaration". You can find it and thriving communities. And NOT policies that take away more freedoms and regulatehere: locals to death! https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/ Humans have less than 1% affect on climate. Hawaii Island will not believe in false narratives with political agendas. Please do your own research on this. Innovative Development &Thriving We strategically apply innovative land use Page 501 Communities strategies incorporating indigenous and contemporary knowledge and place-based practices to direct and manage growth for thriving communities. It is NOT the responsibility of the planning department to manage the health and safety Each community is connected by a of communities. That is an overreach of the multimodal and modernized transportation government! network that provides a system for safe, efficient, and comfortable movement of people and goods. Our communities are adequately served by innovation and efficient public infrastructure, utilities, and services based on existing and future growth needs, sound design principles, and effective maintenance practices. Our communities are thriving and supported and have access to integrative health, education, and social services to support a high quality of life for all residents. Residents have access to adequate (change to: comfortable) and affordable housing to meet the needs of the population and provide equitable (remove) opportunities for household flexibility and mobility. We employ integrated systems that are efficient, equitable (remove), and organized to facilitate coordination and collaboration. Thriving, Diversified, Competitive with Our economy is competitive, innovative, and Economic Alternatives supportive. It helps our communities thrive and increases local economic opportunities. Agriculture is a robust sector that supports local farmers and includes a broad range of agricultural-based businesses that highlight value, organic and good health practices. A high quality of life for locals is maintained when a supportive visitor industry balances economic growth with natural and cultural Page 502 responsibility. Page: 38 2 . 1 Introduction Collaborative biocultural (remove) stewardship is an approach to innovation development that emphasizes collaboration and partnership building among stakeholders (Who are they and what do they have stake in?), and homeowners and integrates natural and cultural resource management strategies to promote thriving communities. conservation, sustainability, and resilience (remove). Cooperative efforts aimed at achieving innovative development sustainable management remove) of ecological systems are crucial for protecting our natural and built environments. Land use planning and management should be holistic, inclusive (remove), and adaptive to reflect thriving communities values, knowledge, and aspirations (remove). The General Plan provides key strategies to achieve biocultural (remove) supportive stewardship, including community engagement, partnership building, collaborative decision-making, and collective action. Environmental and social systems are complex and dynamic. These systems will require adaptive management and continuous learning as we navigate the future. The policies presented in this section seek to foster partnerships that are based on mutual respect, trust, and shared values. The community engagement process must be inclusive to incorporate diverse perspectives and knowledge systems into conservation and development strategies. Following such practices can promote the co-creation of knowledge, the sharing of resources, and the empowerment of communities. By leveraging the strengths and resources of different stakeholders REMOVE (Who are they and what do they have stake in?), and homeowners we can enhance the capacity of communities to manage natural and cultural resources sustainably remove). We can also facilitate the creation of new networks and alliances, promoting social cohesion and resilience. Ultimately, the collaborative biocultural stewardship approach can foster a more integrated, inclusive, and equitable approach to conservation and development that reflects the aspirations and needs of local communities. (REMOVE THIS IS LANGUAGE IT Page 503 IS DESIGNED TO REDUCE FREEDOMS INCREASE GOVERNMENT AND STAKEHOLDER OVERREACH AND BRING IN MORE GOVERNMENT CONTROL) CHANGE TO: We can also facilitate the creation of new innovative programs that support and reflect the aspirations of thriving local communities. This fundamental element of the Plan strives to cultivate a sense of place and connection to the environment and recognizes that the management of natural and cultural resources requires the participation of local communities, government, homeowners and other agencies diverse actors, including communities, governments, non-governmental organizations, and private sector entities. By promoting collaborative decision-making and collective action, we can enhance the effectiveness, equity, and legitimacy of conservation and development and innovative policies. By promoting community-based conservation and restoration strategies, we can enhance ecological integrity, promote biodiversity, and preserve cultural heritage and scenic Iandscapes.(Redundant Remove) Biocultural stewardship acknowledges the role of cultural diversity in shaping environmental perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors (Remove. People do not want to be manipulated). [It recognizes that cultural practices arising from traditional ecological knowledge are integral to maintaining ecosystem services and biological diversity.] remove) Change to: Cultural practices arising from traditional ecological knowledge are integral to supporting the growth of thriving communities that wish to improve their environment. Page 39: Table 1 : Biocultural (change to Land) Stewardship Challenges The word "Bioculture" is reflective of both biological and cultural factors that affect human behavior. Locals do not want the planning department to affect our behavior. Your job is to support the land, environment, and thriving communities. Native Habitat Hawai`i has been known as the extinction capital of the world. Climate change and sea level rise pose threats to existing habitats for native flora and fauna. REMOVE (Again, according to 1944 credential scientists from around the world, there is no climate danger. This is a narrative created by the "stakeholders" to move their agenda forward. Page 504 https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/) Has the water level risen in any of the towns in Hawaii? Longer and/or more severe weather and climate change may increase the likelihood of wildfires. REMOVE (The Maui fire was NOT normal. A fire where trees do not burn but glass is melted out of cars, where animals and humans are left recognizable, and where plastic doesn't burn or even melt is not normal. That was an attack and murder of our Lahaina ohana. That is why only 20 building permits have been issued after a year! AND why Lahahina is STILL locked down!) Invasive species continue to pose a threat to native and endemic species as well economic, environmental, and human health. (Reminder: It is not the responsibility of the planning department to protect people's health.) The carrying capacity of our resources is not comprehensively modeled and monitored. Modeled and monitored should be for government agencies.) The County lacks specific regulations for wetlands, riparian ecosystems, or other valuable habitats. Stewardship The County has a limited budget for its large-scale geographic responsibility for the protection of public trust natural and cultural resources. (Revise. This doesn't make sense. What are you trying to say? What responsibility are you talking about? What does the protection of public trust mean?) Hawai`i Island has a large variation of unique biomes and ecosystems. The difference between traditional and modern practices along with varying mauka to makai ownership makes it difficult to comprehensively steward natural resources. Page 40 Native Habitat The County can collaborate with the State Office of Planning and Sustainable Development to create models for monitoring the carrying capacity of natural resources that will support farmers and thriving communities. Page 505 Ongoing conservation work can continue to evolve from species-specific conservation (e.g., Albizia eradication) to focus on ecosystem restoration across multiple land ownership to protect Hawaii's biodiversity and support local farms. Maintaining healthy, native-dominant forests offers immense savings of land biocultural Remove) and water resources that might otherwise be lost to the impacts of climate change Remove) and invasive species. Conservation lands hold significant value in the water resources they represent. Incentivizing and developing regenerative land uses without further regulations or fines, such as agroforestry, can provide sustainable opportunities to ecosystems and communities. Hawaii can become a statewide adaptation and resiliency leader by focusing on its unique strengths and diversity to evolve with changing realities. Urban forestry can be prioritized or incentivized in the County Code. This means more regulations and possible fines. No thank you! Change to: Support the further growth of current urban forestry Watersheds Establish more place-based watershed partnerships to create unique management plans that incorporate the generational knowledge of those water systems and protect our island's watersheds and local farms. Strengthen the integration of Hawaiian biocultural remove resource management and traditional ecological knowledge across County government to support local farms. Practice an integrated approach to ecosystem-based collaborative management that considers the entire ecosystem and local communities. Watershed protection and management require collaboration and coordination across all levels of government and must include effective community engagement. Revise to: Support Watershed and management coordination which integrates local communities. Stewardship Hawaii Island has a large variation of its unique natural biomes and ecosystems. Page 506 Ongoing interagency coordination, including consultation with place-based land stewards,cultural and historical advisory groups, land and homeowners, and other stakeholders being transparent of what they hold stake in. The County can take a more proactive role in exercising its protective public trust role for natural and cultural resources. This sounds like government overreach. Again, the planning department is NOT responsible for protecting the public. That is a byproduct of what you do but it is NOT the main part of your job! Revise to: The County can take a more proactive role in supporting thriving communities and their natural and cultural resources. Maintain and increase involvement with existing partnerships and identify new partners that help promote and enhance biocultural (remove) Land stewardship. Collaborate to complete additional EPA-approved watershed plans to increase eligibility for future conservation funding. Page 41 2 .2 Biocultural Stewardship Goal , Objectives, Policies, and Actions Objective 1 Increase the biodiversity and resilience of native habitats. Policies 1.4 Maintain the shoreline for recreational, cultural, educational, and/or scientific uses in a manner that is protective of nature, respectful of resources, and is of the maximum benefit to the general public. 1.8 Prioritize native landscaping for all County projects while allowing communities to enjoy it at their leisure. 1.11 Encourage and incentivize green belts, tree plantings, and landscape plans and designs in urban areas without further regulations or fines. Page 507 1.13 Incentivize private land management practices that protect and enhance natural resource and values without further regulations or fines. and, when appropriate, pursue the acquisition of lands for the protection of natural resources (Remove! This is a 110% overreach of the government.) 1.14 Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, farmers, homeowners, and other stakeholders (What do they have a stake in? Who are they?) to: Page 42: a) Implement the Hawaii State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP) (What is this plan? Where can it be found?) b) Better understand and model carrying capacities of the island's habitats and resources c) Improve the inventory of forested lands and associated ecosystem services d) Encourage the continued identification and inclusion of unique wildlife habitat areas of Native Hawaiian habitat within the Natural Area Reserve System e) Anticipate future habitat migration, especially wetlands and coastal ecosystems f) Prioritize quantitative wetland assessment to identify wetlands g) Expand native and/or endemic forest cover h) Improve enforcement for illegal activities that harm or degrade endemic habitats Who is defining endemic habitats and how is it defined? I MUST be defined by Hawaii citizen commission and not anyone outside Hawaii. Mainland people should NOT be able to define this.) 1.18 Public landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to maximize water use efficiency and native plants. Actions 1.b Review tree survey requirements and amend the Code to incorporate as part of site planning for public use. 1.h Develop buffer policies to protect native forests, wildlife, rivers, streams, coastal waters, and other native habitats without. This is too vague. What policies are you considering and will that come with penalties? If so, remove this. Page 508 Page 43 1.i Create incentives for landowners to retain and re-establish forest cover in upland watershed areas with an emphasis on native forest species without further regulations or 1.k Amend the landscape standards in Rule or Code (Remove) to require the use of native plants for screening or landscaping. Change to: Support local education on the importance of using native plants for screening or landscaping. 1.1 Amend the Code to incentivize (Remove) Replace with Support local education on the importance of the establishment of threatened and endangered endemic plant species within their habitable ranges during development approvals. 1.m Review the Code and consider amendments to encourage site clustering of development in order to avoid critical environmental areas and assets. REMOVE This is more unneeded regulations. This is BIG Island. People do not need to be ontop of each other. You're promoting too many regulations. 1.n Develop and establish Open Space Network Overlay on current unoccupied territory for natural landscape features, such as beaches and dunes, forests, streams, floodplains, wetlands, estuaries, or recharge areas that have the inherent capacity to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the impacts of climate change (Remove) 1.q Develop comprehensive programs and policies and provide resources for enhancing urban forestry canopy cover in unoccupied areas and without further regulations or fines for local farmers. 1.0 Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders and local farmers to develop a program for the identification and protection of plant species of special status, including plants significant for cultural practitioners. Page 44: 2. 7 Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, farmers, and homeowners, and other stakeholders (Remove. Who are these people and what do they have stake in?) to: o a) Implement a comprehensive conservation plan that identifies priority watershed areas for habitat restoration and enhancement without further regulations or fines on locals. o b) Review and designate forest, river corridors, and watershed areas into the conservation district during State land use boundary comprehensive reviews. Page 509 o c) Monitor nearshore water quality and impacts to reefs and marine environments and address land-based sources of impacts. o d) Protect and restore wetlands and riparian corridors to ensure more pristine water quality, decrease erosion, and increase sediment management, groundwater infiltration, nutrient/pollutant uptake, soil moisture retention, stormwater abatement, and cultural/community connections without further regulations or fines on locals.. o e) Develop reasonable standards to improve stream and coastal water quality monitoring and encourage local communities to develop such projects without further regulations or fines on locals. Page 45 Objective 3 Increase direct community restoration and collaborative efforts to conserve and nourish the island's biocultural resources. Policies 3.1 Encourage an overall conservation ethic in the use of Hawaii's resources by protecting, preserving, and conserving critical and significant natural resources without further fines and regulation on the population. Pg 47 Actions 4.b Change from: Reassess Certified Local Government status to ensure the support of farmers and homeowners and maximize funding opportunities for self-supporting communities. 4.h Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, farmers, homeowners, other local communities, and other stakeholders (remove or let us know what they have stake in) to develop design guidelines for designated communities containing significant historic buildings, sites, or landscapes. 4.i Assess and prioritize County-owned lands for historic site restoration in collaboration with government, private and nonprofit agencies, farmers, homeowners, other local communities, and other stakeholders (remove or let us know what they have stake in). Page 510 Page 48 Objective 5 Protect, restore, and enhance our communities' unique scenic character. Policies 5.c Develop a process for reviewing and revising guidelines for designating Natural Beauty Sites without invasion of current resident areas or local farms. 5.d Establish a Scenic Resources Protection Program to identify, inventory, and protect areas of significant beauty. The program could include recommendations from the Scenic Resources Inventory and Mapping Project (2016) without invasion of current resident areas or local farms. Page 56 3 . 1 Introduction The climate change section of the General Plan is intended to be used as a policy guide for the coordinated climate mitigation and adaptation efforts on Hawaii Island. This element provides a high-level policy framework, building on the scientific knowledge and government-level strategies and actions developed in the Integrated Action Plan (ICAP) for the island of Hawaii. This is VERY Concerning! As stated earlier the World Climate Declaration was signed currently by 1,944 scientists stating there is no climate danger. Here is what a few more scientists have to say. On the Boston Globe's YouTube channel, on May 14, 2010, MIT Professor of Meteorology Richard Lindzen shared the following: If one asks, "Is the temperature increasing or decreasing?"it's always doing one or the other. I have no concern about that. By asking people to worry about whether it's going up or down, you're immediately establishing dishonesty. The Earth is always changing. Climate change is nothing you have to prove. It always is happening. It always has happened. So, to make that into something alarming seems a little bit weird to me'." Global warming:why you should not worry,"by the Boston Globe,May 14,2010. Page 511 Dr. David Dilley, a former Meteorologist with the National Weather Service, United States Air Force, Senior Research Meteorologist, and Climatologist at Global Weather Oscillations Inc., has 50 years' experience in meteorology and climatology. He's also a working partner in the International Hurricane Protection Association. This is what he has to say about global warming: Global warming begins in the Arctic and Antarctic. It has about a 230-year cycle. When it comes back, it takes about 20 years for it to hit its peak. It started in the 1990s and hit its peak this past year. With global warming, the Antarctic and higher regions warm up. As it warms up, you have less cold air available to filter south into the middle latitudes, and it warms the middle latitudes. That is global warming2." Dilley explained that the same thing happens with global cooling but in reverse, as the temperature increases and decreases in cycles. Dilley then shared that 2022 was the coldest spring and summer on record, with the winter of 2021 being the coldest winter on record. He also shared that in April 2023, five months before the Lahaina Fire, the Earth was running low-to-normal temperatures, and the Arctic was actually cooling down. Dilley is also an expert of the "Milankovitch Cycle," which illustrates the rotation of the Earth, sun, and the moon, and their effects on global warming. According to Dilley, every 120,000 years, the Earth comes closest to the sun. Then, about 68,000 years later, it's the furthest approach from the sun. He says that our closest approach was 8,000 years ago. Dilley states, "We were warmer 6,000 to 8,000 years ago than we are today. The reason was that we were the closest approach to the sun and we had just come out of an Ice Age. We're 8,000 years off the peak now, and so we're actually cooling down." John Coleman, also an expert on the weather, shares the same thoughts. Coleman was the original weatherman on Good Morning America in the 1970s. He founded The Weather Channel in the 1980s. In 1982, he was voted "Meteorologist of the Year" by the American Meteorology Society. With regards to the Arctic and sea levels, Coleman states: They tell us that we're melting the polar ice caps. The Antarctic polar ice cap is at an all-time high, and the Arctic ice cap is increasing again after diminishing. They tell us that we're flooding the shorelines. Do you live on the coast? How much has the water come up in your lifetime? They manufactured data to make it look like we're increasing the water level of the oceans, but we're nota." Professor Richard Lindzen states: https://youtu.b e/pwv VephTIH U?si=Xo xAcP c51 JN OX deR 2 "Signals - Global Cooling Cycle Beginning - Global Warming Ending-Professor David Dilley,"by David Dilley GlobalWeatherCycles,May 10,2023. 3t 3"John Coleman's case against significant man-made global warming,''by Kusi News, June 24, 2013. https://youtu.b e/K56fins2VZTc?si=Cn-Ap S 8z2Y_kiI76 Page 512 At any given place, traditionally, sea level is measured by what are called tide gauges: a stick in the water, basically. Two things that change are what a tide gauge shows: the land moving up and down and the sea moving up and down. In most places, it's the land that has the biggest effect, and so you don't have a good measure of sea level rise14' " Let's review the danger of water rising and engulfing coastline towns. Is there one city or town on the shoreline that is in danger of being underwater? Is Venice, a town that lives at sea level, in danger of being lost to the sea? Have home insurance companies stopped giving insurance policies to homeowners who live on the coastline because they'll soon be underwater? The answer would be no! On August 21, 2020, NASA published an article titled "NASA-led Study Reveals the Causes of Sea Level Rise Since 1900." It reads: Sea levels have risen on average 1.6 millimeters (0.063 inches) per year between 1900 and 20184." That means the sea level has risen a little over 7.4 inches in the last 118 years! Does that show the world is in danger of being engulfed by water? No. It shows that it will be a very, very, very long time before humans are in danger. Does that mean documentaries like "An Inconvenient Truth" are telling lies? An article was published in the Seattle Times on October 12, 2007, titled "British judge ruled the Oscar-winning film on global warming, "An Inconvenient Truth," contains "nine errors5."" Here is the list of inaccuracies found in Court taken from the "Friends Of Science" website6. The inaccuracies in the documentary include: 1. The film claims that melting snow s on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government's expert was forced to concede that this is not correct. 2. The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 levels cause temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period, the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2,000 years. NASA-led Study Reveals the Causes of Sea Level Rise Since 1900," by Ian J. O'Neill/ Jane J.Lee,August 21, 2020.https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3012/nasa-led-study-reveals-the-causes-of-sea-level-rise-since-1900/ Truth is,Gore film has 9 errors,British judge rules,"by Mary Jordan,Oct 12,2007. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/truth-is-gore-film-has-9-errors-british-judge-rules/ 6"Inaccuracies in Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth-A Ruling of the British High Court" https://friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/FOS%20EssayBritish HighCourt Ruling_on An Inconvenient Tru th html Page 513 3. The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that it was "not possible" to attribute one-off events to global warming. 4. The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that this was not the case. 5. The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr. Gore had misread the study: in fact, four polar bears drowned, and this was because of a particularly violent storm. 6. The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream, throwing Europe into an ice age. The Claimant's evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility. 7. The film blames global warming for species losses, including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim. 8. The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7 meters, causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact, the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40 centimeters over the next 100 years and there is no such threat of massive migration. 9. The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government was unable to substantiate this, and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim. Also, the Court's interim ruling included the following: 1. The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt, causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for a millennia. 2. The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting; the evidence was that it is, in fact, increasing. High Court Judge Michael Burton stated: Former Vice President Al Gore, the documentary's moderator, makes nine statements in the film that are not supported by the current mainstream scientific consensus. For instance, Gore's script implies that Greenland or West Antarctica might melt soon, creating a sea-level rise of up to 20 feet that would cause devastation from San Francisco to the Netherlands to Bangladesh139." The judge called this "distinctly alarmist" and said the consensus view is that if Greenland melted, it would release this amount of water "but only after, and over, a millennia." The climate change narrative will destroy people's freedom and add more regulations, fines and fees. Do not allow this government narrative to continue on the Big Island. The people do NOT Page 514 want more laws, regulations, and fines based on a false narrative that completely changes community infrastructures from self-reliant to "sustainable" living, with "stakeholders" carrying the purse strings and the power. That is NOT Pono! Gregg Braden is a geologist, five-time New York Times best-selling author, scientist, international educator, and renowned as a pioneer in the emerging paradigm based in science, social policy, and human potential, had this to say about the dangers of carbon on the planet: The idea that carbon dioxide is a poison is a false narrative to begin with. We are carbon-based beings. By demonizing carbon dioxide and carbon life, we're actually demonizing ourselves'." Science 101 shows us that plants take in carbon dioxide and give off oxygen. If plants die due to lack of carbon dioxide, so do humans for lack of oxygen. During the Cretaceous Period, which began 145 million years ago and ended 66 million years ago, we had a lot more carbon than we do today - tons more! This was the time of the dinosaurs, and everything was huge! Plants were much larger than they are now. The sea levels were also a lot higher during the Cretaceous Period. Was that due to more carbon dioxide? Not according to an article at Britannica.com written by Thor Arthur Hansen, Professor of Invertebrate Paleontology, Paleoecology, and Evolution at Western Washington University, U.S., and Carl Fred Koch, Professor of Geological Sciences at Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia. It was fact-checked by The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica and last updated on Feb 7, 2024. The article said that sea level was higher primarily because the water in the ocean basins was displaced by the enlargement of mid-oceanic ridges$. It was not due to carbon! It was due to the Earth's mantle. On January 11, 2023, in an episode titled "Why "THE POWERS THAT BE" are So Desperate to Reduce Carbon Dioxide on OUR Planet?" posted on geologist and scientist Gregg Braden's YouTube channel, John L. Petersen of the Arlington Institute stated: If you could look at the ice cores in Antarctica and Greenland, you would see that the temperature of the Earth increases or decreases around 800 years before the change in carbon dioxide. That means carbon dioxide does not drive the change; it is the response to the temperature changes." In the same interview, Braden stated: Gregg Braden - Why "THE POWERS THAT BE"are So Desperate to Reduce Carbon Dioxide on OUR Planet?" by Gregg Braden Official,January 11,2023. //youtu.be/7vJ-Qefos8A?si=BviOKcdznXx6tgS0 8"Cretaceous Period,"by Carl Fre Koch,Thor Arthur Hansen, https://www.britannica.corr Cretac as-Period 9 "Why 'THE POWERS THAI HF' are So Desperate to Reduce Carbon Dioxide on OUR Planet'?" by Gregg Braden,January 11,2023.https. y.;ucsi=cz2jDjrSinJalTiDx Page 515 We're being led to believe that carbon levels of CO2 have never been higher; that the Earth is going to be destroyed if they are higher; and that CO2 is the driving temperature, both of which are not true147." Gregg showed a graph indicating that during the Cretaceous Period, carbon dioxide levels were over three times higher than they are today. Carbon dioxide levels were between 800-1,000 parts per million. During this period, there was an extreme greening of the Earth. Plants and life thrived! According to Braden: If CO2 drops below 184 parts per million, that seems to be the threshold where we (humans) are in trouble! If CO2 drops below those levels, we are actually cutting off the very life-force that is providing oxygen on this planet." Is the entire CO2 narrative intended to increase the bankroll of the "stakeholders" around the world invested in renewable energy with no regard for human life? Stakeholders who've invested in progressive and "sustainable energy" have a lot to gain in their pocketbooks by populations living in fear of climate change and believing they will be saving" the Earth by going along with renewable energy and electric vehicles. They'll also be giving up a lot of their freedoms in doing so. Page 59 Transportation The General Plan further discusses strategies for decreasing vehicle reliance and (Remove) improving public Transportation Access and Mobility. You have no right to hinder people's right to travel. Please take ANYTHING out that references decreasing people's use of their vehicle! The County can reduce its footprint by increasing the percentage of renewable fuel used to power public facilities and infrastructure, reducing VMT, (REMOVE). YOU CANNOT LIMIT PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO TRAVEL. THAT VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTION AND IS BEYOND YOUR JURISDICTION Page 61 The General Plan expands on opportunities for climate-conscious land development in the Land Use section without violating people's rights, over regulating or increasing fines. Page 63 Page 516 The General Plan further expands on strategies to increase resilience in the Transportation Access and Mobility, Public Utilities, and Public Facilities and Services sections without violating the Constitution, or over regulating farmers and homeowners. The General Plan expands on renewable energy in the Public Utilities section with safety studies prior to installation, and without increasing costs to the public. Page 66 Transportation Promoting the use of electric vehicles through expanding charging infrastructure and educating the public on the safety studies done for the use of these vehicles from third parties. Renewable Energy Increasing the use of green technology (including third party safety studies) will increase the energy independence of individuals and businesses on the island. Supporting renewable energy technologies, such as solar, wind, ocean thermal energy conversion (OTEC), and geothermal (Remove. This practice is not safe for an island with active volcanoes!) Land Use &the Built Environment Implementing smart growth strategies, without violating people's right to travel can reduce urban sprawl and create more walkable communities. Developing a County building code that balances health and safety, affordability, and carbon footprint (REMOVE! This is more regulations and fines. NOT Pono! It is NOT your responsibility to focus on people's health. That is for each individual! This is an overreach! Encouraging the construction of energy-efficient buildings and retrofitting existing buildings being sure to prove any additional technology is safe for the public.. Promoting regenerative agriculture practices that reduce emissions and enhance carbon sequestration while not further regulating farms or increasing fines. Greening urban areas increases the availability of cool areas for residents to live and recreate. Integrating energy savings and waste management, without more regulations and fines on the population, provides an opportunity to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in new development. Conservation Protecting reefs and marine ecosystems that act as carbon sinks, without hindering public use. Implementing a One Water strategy and other water-saving technologies and practices can reduce the energy required for water treatment and distribution. This is NOT a good idea. If this goes down, where will people get their water? Remove or revise. Conserving natural habitats without hindering public use to preserve biodiversity and enhance ecosystem resilience to climate change. Efforts to expand renewable energy, with third party safety studies and without hindering public Page 517 can consider the preservation of unique and diverse ecosystems, avoiding negative impacts on wildlife and natural habitats. Additional Measures Improving public engagement about climate change and encouraging sustainable practices. Remove and educate yourself on the fact that scientists from around the world have stated there is no climate danger.) Implementing policies and regulations that support climate mitigation efforts, without further regulations or fines on locals. (Please educate yourself) Supporting research into new technologies and approaches for reducing emissions and enhancing resilience and include third party safety studies while ensuring no further cost to the public. Page 67 Water Resources • Management Promoting a One Water strategy can create cross-agency collaboration to identify and address overlapping challenges in adapting to sea level rise and building more resiliency into infrastructure across water, wastewater and stormwater sectors. How does this promote collaboration? This seems like a monopoly. Agriculture & • Food Security Encouraging the cultivation of climate-resilient and diversified crops to enhance food security without further regulations and fines. Infrastructure & Urban Planning Retrofitting or relocating bridges and roads provides an opportunity to reduce GHG emissions by reducing miles traveled. (REMOVE) THIS VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTION. YOU CANNOT DEPRIVE PEOPLE OF THE RIGHT TO TRAVEL. ALSO, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO RELOCATE" LOCAL BRIDGES. THIS SHOULD BE REMOVED! Implement zoning and land use planning policies that consider climate risks and promote sustainable development after a full investigation of the climate change narrative is examined. (Do not further regulate and fine people without fully investigating the climate change narrative and proving that any additional technology is safe for the human life.) Social Equity Engage communities in planning and decision-making processes to ensure that adaptation measures are socially inclusive (Remove. This is woke language.) and culturally appropriate. Page 518 Increasing equitable resilience to climate hazards will benefit historically marginalized and frontline Engage communities (What does this mean?) and those that are vulnerable to climate change impacts. Energy & • Transportation Invest in renewable energy sources that are proven safe and affordable to the public to reduce GHG emissions and increase energy resilience. Promote energy efficiency in buildings and transportation that are proven safe and affordable to the public to reduce overall energy consumption and without increasing regulations or fines Biodiversity & Ecosystems Managed retreat strategies and new shoreline setback regulations would expand open space along the shoreline to support coastal ecosystems such as anchialine pools without hindering public access. Supporting conservation programs that are proven safe for the people and the environment can help protect native species and habitats from climate change impacts without hindering public access and without increasing regulations and fines. Strengthening measures to control and eradicate invasive species can help protect local ecosystems. Enhance habitat connectivity to allow species to migrate in response to changing environmental conditions without hindering public access and without increasing regulations and fines. Education & Capacity Building Build capacity for local government agencies by providing training and resources that improve their ability to plan and implement climate adaptation initiatives without increasing regulations and fines. Collaborate and coordinate with the County's Office of Sustainability, Climate, Equity, and Resilience (OSCER). This is woke language and should be removed. Support research and monitoring efforts to better understand climate impacts and the effectiveness of adaptation measures. (Please educate yourself on this false narrative) Develop and implement educational programs to raise awareness about climate change and adaptation strategies. REMOVE (This is a FALSE narrative that you would be perpetuating.) Page 68 Page 519 3 .2 Climate Change Goal , Objectives, Policies, and Actions This ENTIRE section should be removed. Rosa Korie WARNED that what is planned for this country through the planning departments "is an erasure ofjurisdictional boundaries. It is a loss of private property rights, a loss of sovereignty- both personalphysical sovereignty and physical sovereignty in terms of our nation -and it's a loss of our freedom." From Rosa Koire's special presentation to the New Hampshire Legislature. https://youtu.be/350IbVtpzvw?si=u_NNsNoL9XtGxDEA Page 71 8.3 Collaborate with farmers, government,private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders REMOVE Who are they?What do they have stake in?to monitor impacts that may be specific to Hawai`i County due to its unique exposure to climate change and sea level rise impacts. (Please educate yourself on this false narrative.Is Kona or Hilo or any Hawaiian town close to being underwater?NO!) 8.11 Partner with government(e.g., State Office of Planning and Sustainable Development OPSD]),private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders REMOVE Who are they? What do they have stake in?to analyze conservation buffers to accommodate shifting native habitats impacted by climate change,particularly wetlands and high-elevation forests. Remove this ENTIRE section! We do NOT want"buffer"zones! You want to take away the ability for people to be in nature. That is NOT pono!) 8.b Support and partner with government,private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders REMOVE Who are they?What do they have stake in? on research for adaptive policies and technology that includes safety studies to the public and environment,that increase resilience without further regulations and fines on the public.. 8.d Adopt a land acquisition program with potential leaseback options for the purchase of hazard-prone locations or those with beneficial attributes for climate adaptation and mitigation. REMOVE. THIS IS GOVERNMENT OVERREACH! THIS IS NOT A COMMUNIST COUNTRY! YOU CANNOT TAKE PEOPLE'S PROPERTY! 8.e Collaborate with government,private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders REMOVE Who are they?What do they have stake in? to implement environmentally beneficial upgrades for wastewater,irrigation, and/or landscaping,including sea level rise, storm, and other climate change considerations. (Remove). Getting at least three bids for contracts from different companies. Page 520 Pg 74 4.1.1 Introduction 1st para: "achieve sustainable development and" (Remove) change "resilient" to safe 2nd para: "Sustainable development is a key objective of land use planning for the County. By strategically" and in the sentence "Land use planning is essential. (Remove) change "resilient" to safe. 3rd para: - change "resilience" to safety. "and the impacts of climate change" (Remove) Better prepared for and protected against potential disasters. Change: "sustainable" to diversified. desirable" to fair, equitable. Last para 5th line down: Change: "should" to may Pg 75 Economic Opportunity Planning: "other growth sectors." Need to be specific, identify other growth sectors. Last sentence: "muck like the weave of sustainability," (Remove) Pg. 76 Table 16: Land Use Key Trends Changing & Aging Population: "Over the next 25 years 0 9% per annum" decline in population already seen and projected needs to addressed as to why the population is in decline. How you do Planning if you don't address reasons for population decline. This is crucial. Housing Affordability & Choice: "In 2010..." down to "However, on average, Hawaii County's overcrowding " Shifting Visitor Accommodation Types: - Change "With the upward trend...." to "rentals." & There is also a shift.." Revise that entire sentence. Job Availability & Growth: - Revise last sentence "In 2020, 14% of the....." Page 521 Pg. 77 Table 17: Land Use Challenges Revise: Infrastructure section Regulations section Funding & Financing entire section Land Use Compatibility entire section Public Engagement entire section My note is What is NIMBYism?) Pg. 78 Table 18: Land Use Opportunities Infrastructure:: last sentence "County departments can provide " Regulations: Red: "Collaborate across State and County agencies to " (Need more public input and ideas); The most direct role the County plays..,..property tax policy." (Need much more research on property tax rates, regulations, policies & scrutinized by the public who are affected by paying property taxes. This should be the most glaring concern so that we do not leave tax burden for future generations who may lose their properties to taxes paid to the government). Funding & Financing: "Partner with the State and other counties to create a capacity building plan stakeholders." (Remove) Market Conditions: "Seek to acquire land for affordable housing developments...." Add: without violating people's right to own property or take this out. Revise it. This is government overreach! Land Use Compatibility: "Demonstrate smart growth developments." (Remove) Public Engagement: "Encourage affordable housing projects to meet the needs of neighborhoods (YIMBY) without further regulations and fines." (What is YIMBY?) and next line Apply strategies to...." "stakeholder". Who are these stakeholders? What do they have stake in? Pg. 79 Page 522 4.1.2 Land Use Goal, Objectives, Policies, and Actions Item 9.7 - Red: "Encourage" change to Mandate developers Item 9. 8 - Red: "Route selection for " that entire sentence. (This is a high priority revision as it pertains directly to 5G dangers. Here is where the people/public need to have direct input/approval/changes. Item 9.a - Red: "Develop a process for County " this is crucial for public scrutiny & opportunity for the public to get transparency. Transparency can only be realized if we, the public include ourselves into all governmental processes. If not, we will not get transparency, period! Pg 80 Land Use Goal, Objectives, Policies, and Actions -continued Item 9.e - "Conduct a review and re-evaluation " entire sentence to be revised. Item 10.3 "Proposed discretionary permits for large developments.....Ka'u Districts"-Not clear needs revision. Item 10.b "Amend allow CPDs to be applied to all zoning districts..." - Why amend the Zoning Code? We need to compare current Zoning Codes to what they propose to amend to see if the people or the developers have the advantage. What are CPDs? Item 10.c- Red: "Collaborate with the State Office of Planning Native Hawaiian customary and traditional.." Need to revise to ensure that Hawaiian cultural experts, NOT the State government or its agencies have any input for preserving, protecting, educating, safeguarding, sharing, marketing, ..every aspect of utilizing our native Hawaiian (kanaka maoli) heritage of language, practices, traditions, religion & more belong exclusively to the kanaka maoli elders, experts, kupuna, kahuna, healers NEVER the government or its agencies...NEVER!!! Pg 81 continue Item 11.4 "Concurrency reviews should incorporate (Remove)" entire sentence absolutely NO! Actions 11.a - Red: "Collaborate with the SHPD to create....." entire sentence - Need experts. Page 523 11.d - Red: "Amend Zoning Code...." do not give the Planning Director more power, it's time to decrease power for that position, we need to humble these government workers/servants. Now is that time as history has shown us, when they have power, they want more; when they have more power, it's not enough & the cycle continues while the people suffer. STOP giving away the power from the people. 11.f- "Update traffic impact " (Remove) entire sentence. Travel should not be the Planning Board's power to take away from me or you, ever. Objective 12 Reduce the threat to life and property from natural hazards and disasters. Policies The above sentence - Red: add "unnatural & natural hazards" - It is important to identify the reality that unnatural hazards have always existed, therefore, why is that omitted? 12.3 Red: "Consider natural Again add in unnatural &force the Planning Board to address DE disasters, weather machine disasters which are human created disasters, which is criminal. Why shouldn't the Planning Board include these disasters as they certainly affect the health & safety of the people & our environment. 12.8 Red: "Encourage the development...." entire sentence. Again, must address DE/Weather machines/human initiated disasters. Pg 82 Actions Item 12.a - Red: "Update the Building Code " entire sentence need extreme revisions, initially wanted to delete, but it is necessary to revise to include unnatural/man made disasters & address "carbon footprint". These are areas to not hide by deleting, but rather talk about them through revisions. Item 12.g - "Amend the Zoning Code...." (Remove) Until they can prove climate change is happening, delete this section that refers to climate change as that is a false narrative that we the people/public should not allow to continue. I do not want to tell a lie over & over again until everyone believes it. That's breaking the 10 commandments. Pg. 83 4.1.3 Overview of Land Use Designations and Maps No changes. Page 524 Pg. 84 Table 19: General Plan Land Use Designations and Maps No Changes Pg. 85 Agriculture and Natural Land Use No Changes Pg 86 4.1.4 Urban Growth Areas 2nd para: Red: "Smart Growth" change to something safer, know what it represents not hidden meanings. Black out: the word "sustainable" and from "More specifically, urban centers have been designed to create.... Driving." - The government or its agencies should not impede or alter the rights of citizens to travel it's call our right to travel, which is constitutional. Pg 87 Objective 13 Increase the use of Smart Growth principles to focus development within designated urban centers. Policies Red: change "Smart Growth" to Evaluate and analyze development within designated urban centers. Item 13.3 Red: "Incentivize" what is that & how does it benefit the public? 13.6 Red: "may include additional acreages to account for " must revise section to make it clearer as to how this inclusion will work to the advantage or disadvantage of historic sites, public access, parks, & open spaces. More clarity is necessary because saying ok to unclear PLANNING" should never be accepted. Item #13.12 - Red: Revise entire sentence "Urban renewal, rehabilitation...." need to include people or the public not just communities, businesses, & governmental agencies. Planning Boards should always include the people/public. This will give people the power to make decisions, not just testify for 3 minutes at a Planning Commission hearing. That needs to change. More people/public involvement needs to be promoted. This involvement may be the inspiration or motivation for people to become active in planning for themselves, their future generations. It is time for governments & businesses to take a back seat! Item 13.13 Red: Revise entire sentence. "Support master planning by ....." it's not "Support" it should be to Scrutinize, evaluate, analyze and recommend by experts and the people. Page 525 Pg. 88 Commercial - Industrial Item 13.28 Red: "Discretionary permit applications. Entire sentence need revision as it is not fair to have Discretionary permit applications for new commercial developments. Everyone follows the rules, no exceptions by the Planning Board. Resort Item 13.49 - Red: Revise "On-site affordable housing and workforce units shall be excluded from the total permitted visitor unit counts " Again, how does this exclusion help the people, the visitors, the workforce? How does it affect permitted visitor unit counts? Pg 90 Actions 13.c Red: revise "Amend the Subdivision Code to ensure block sizes are based...." What are the current codes &what are the proposed amendments to compare who will have the advantage or disadvantage of this proposal to Amend Subdivision Code. Pg. 91 Urban Character Guidelines Table 20: Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Character Guidelines No Changes. Pg. 92 Table 21: Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) Character Guidelines No Changes Pg. 93 Table 22: Urban Neighborhood Center Character Guidelines No Changes Pg. 94 Table 23: Industrial Center Character Guidelines No Changes Pg. 95 Table 24: Criteria for Industrial Land Conversion to Commercial/Mixed-Use No Changes Pg. 96 Table 25: Resort Area Character Guidelines No Changes Pg. 97 4.1.5 Rural No Changes Page 526 Pg. 98 Objective 14 Maximize the use of Rural designated lands to preserve rural character and lifestyle. Policies All items from 14.1, 14.2, 14.3, 14.4, 14.5, 14.6 - Red: Must revise all items as the Planning Board is asking for Support of everything they are doing, which contradicts any changes that the public may be deemed detrimental. Asking for"blind" support is ridiculous. Actions - Items 14.a, 14.b, 14.c, & 14.d Red: Revise all items as it is asking to Amend Zoning Code, zoning districts which is crucial to see current codes compared to amendments. How are these amendments affecting the public to their advantage vs. disadvantages. This is very important to NOT just accept amendments. Thorough research is necessary to protect the public. Pg. 99 Table 26: Rural Neighborhood Character Guidelines No Changes Pg. 100 4.1.6 Agriculture Last para: "The General Plan provides planning tools to incentivize the highest and best use of productive agricultural lands. The Plan's policies entire paragraph need to be revised. I am especially concerned with the word "incentivize the highest and best use... here again what does this mean, how will it be done, who benefits. Pg. 101 Objective 15 Support the active use of Productive Agricultural lands. Actions All items 15.a, 15.b, 15.c. 15.d, 15.e must be revised Not just Amend. Pg. 102 Actions (continue) Item 15.f- Revise "Update the Real Property Tax Code....." need public input for transparency. Item 15.g Revise "Amend the Zoning Code..." again do not just accept Amending Item 15.k Revise "Collaborate with USDA and the State.... It's not just collaborate, it's what are the decisions based upon, what are the final decisions, how are these decisions helping farmers. Since, we have passed hundreds of years farming in Hawaii you would think we have identified major problems, why these problems do not get resolved, who are responsible for the non-resolutions. This is just repeating ....USDA, the State who have been in charge of agriculture, I want to see a report card that covers 1950s to 2023. Report cards are Page 527 transparency mechanisms to identify who & what are creating our farmer's problems. We cannot fix anything without transparency. Politicians say it, but absolutely no actions. This section is entitled ACTION. Let us begin to act. Pg. 104 4.2.1 Introduction Third para: "Resilience...." I don't want the word resilience to be an escape mechanism for the government or its agencies. That word should change. The last para: , he Plan is focused on improving connectivity within ....." this sounds good, but I don't see good results as I am pass 70 yrs old. We should not accept "rinse & repeat". What did the Planning Board learn from over 100 yrs. Of past failures? They say they focus on improving, yet we cannot determine how they will improve. Stronger language to ensure that the public can know they plan to improve. Pg. 105 Table 27: Transportation Key Trends No Changes Pg. 106 Table 28: Transportation Challenges All items Red: Revisions necessary. It refers to electric cars, Pre-COVID-19 (false narratives that must be stopped) Pg. 107 Table 29: Transportation Opportunities All items Red: Need revisions since they want to establish metrics, improve interagency collaboration, prepare projects, standardize interagency agreements. It contains a multitude of changes that are unclear, very ambiguous, & again, transparency is lacking. Pg. 108 4. 2. 2 Transportation Goal, Objective, Policies, and Actions All items Red: Requires revisions. Examples: item 16.2 "Encourage safe and convenient use non-polluting" What is non-polluting to the Planning Board? What do they know about pollution as they don't know that EMFs are dangerous pollutants. And example: Item 16.10 Identify and evaluate transportation energy and climate issues." We need to stop the false Pg. 109 Actions - continue All items - Red: Revisions necessary. Same reasons as above for Pg. 108. Page 528 Sorry Michelle - did not complete pages 104 to 118-119. Can do later/Kalei K. completed today, Monday 9-23-24 at 12:01 pm. Pg. 110 4.2. 3 Active Living Corridors and Public Access No Changes Pg. 111 Objective 17 Increase transportation connectivity. Policies All items Red: Need revisions. Example: Item 17.1 "Ensure Native Hawaiian access rights are clearly expressed...." This is an area of talk talk talk & no action. Again, what violations have already occurred, how long have these violations been going on, have these violations stopped? Just putting in a sentence in a Plan does not mean it has been adhered to. Therefore, these proposals are weak. As a native Hawaiian it is imperative to get enforcement for these violations, identify violations, how long it's been happening, why &who are responsible to stop violations, protect native Hawaiian access rights. If this item # is weak, which it is - than the others need revisions. Pg. 112 Table 30: Public Access Spacing Standards No Changes Pg. 4.2.4 Mass Transit All paragraphs need revisions Red: revisions necessary. Mass Transit has been proven wrong on Oahu, the Rail. Over budgeted, from hundreds of millions of dollars (budgeted) to billions of dollars, NOT budgeted. Who is paying for this government error? You, me & our visitors. We have an historic example from the City & County of Honolulu. The people protested against this Rail", but years later a Mayor brought back the Rail & all Mayors thereafter continue with this project. Please investigate this "Planning" before Hawaii County repeats history. All words in this section/page are the same words use by the Planning Dept. of the City & County of Honolulu. Absolutely requires total revisions to 4.2.4 Mass Transit Pg. 114 Objective 18 Increase mass transit ridership by 50 percent by 2045 Policies All items are basic objectives. No changes (yet) Pg. 115 4.2.5 Roadways 2nd to last para: What is the County's Vision Zero Action Plan Pink: Concern Page 529 Pg. 116 Objective 19 Reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) All items Red: Need revisions Concern - What is reduce vehicle miles traveled? Why reduce vehicle miles traveled? What is this agenda for& what will it accomplish? Who will benefit? Again, our right to travel cannot be altered or impeded as that right is protected by the US Constitution & God. Pg. 117 Objective 20 Achieve a transportation system that employs all modes of transportation at a community scale. All items need to be revised Pg. 117 continue: Objective 21 Incorporate green infrastructure to reduce stormwater runoff. Policies All item' .,u. Concern See item 21.1 "green infrastructure strategies, and pollution prevention procedures...." Again, sine the Planning Board does not understand EMF pollution & its dangerous - what are they talking about here "pollution prevention procedures.." Pg. 118 continue from above. Actions & Objective 22 Increase transportation safety for transportation's most vulnerable users and reduce traffic fatalities.Policies All items Red: revise Pg. 119 Continue from above. All items from 22.7 to 22.9 Red: revise Concern. 22.7 Dcvclop roadway standards to accommodate cmcrging technology for conncctcd and automated vehicles. This appears to be referencing the very unproven technology of`driverless cars??' Emerging technology needs to go through rigorous standards of testing before being released onto roadways. This text here, with a clear reference to something that is already proving dangerous on the roadways and the subject of lawsuits does not belong in our County Plan. 22.8 Maintain dedicated roadway standards that are appropriate to roadway type and achieve active transportation and safety goals. Page 530 22.9 Engage and collaborate with the owners of private roads and local community groups to help identify and develop road management agreements that mitigate road closures to provide emergency evacuation routes. Actions 22.a Amend the County Code to incorporate Vision Zero safety principles and Complete Street design principles. This is too vague and should be elaborated in detail. These safety principles need to be spelled out or they don't belong in the County Plan. 22.b Develop educational programs promoting traffic safety. Where something is designated an `action' in a County General Plan Document, sufficient detail should be provided. This is too vague and should be elaborated in detail. Objective 23 Adequately maintain public transportation systems. Policies 23.1 Maintain an Asset Management Program aimed at utilizing maintenance plans for pavement, bridges, and other road infrastructure to prolong the life of our transportation system as well as reduce its whole-life cost. 23.2 Maintain the unique features of historic bridges, while balancing safety needs and preserving historic and scenic character. 23.3 Prioritize the replacement of deficient and inadequate bridges and maintain pedestrian/bicycle access across bridges. 23.4 Design new bridges and bridge improvements to accommodate and not negatively impede identified scenic resources. 23.5 Evaluate freight routes identified in the State Freight Master Plan for required improvements to meet roadway standards. 23.6 Encourage the adoption of innovative materials and methods that improve roadway sustainability and resilience. Actions 23.a Create an asset management program. 23.b Continue the bridge inspection program and expand rehab or replacement to include active transportation accommodations. 4. 2 Transportation Access and Mobility I County of Hawaii General Plan 119 Page 531 Roadway Standards The County adheres to several federal and industry standards for roadway design. These include the AASHTO Green Book and Roadside Design Guide, the MUTCD, the NACTO, and the Highway Capacity Manual.5 Examples of topics addressed by these guidelines include road geometry (e.g., curves, sight distance), safety within ROWs adjacent to travel ways, design speeds, level of service, signs/striping/signaling, and urban transit. In addition to these sources, the County adheres to the following locally defined standards. Street Standards Highways shall not be wider than four through travel lanes that accommodate single occupancy vehicles and should be limited to the most populated areas typically connecting residential areas with employment centers. Integrate transportation networks to prioritize the most vulnerable roadways users and the greenest modes of travel through a Multimodal Hierarchy (Figure 7) that prioritizes investments in the following order: 1. Pedestrian 2. Public Transit 3. Bicycle 4. Auto This is a directive for future transportation policy ? It is 4 words and yet it is a giant reach toward a set of ideals and it is not explained at all in detail. OBJECTION : This `policy directive' reflects a radical socialist agenda of forcing people to give up automobiles and give up their autonomy at the same time. This shows contempt for the most basic principles of freedom. . We refer you to : The United States Constitution which protects the freedom to move about within the country, both domestically and internationally. This fundamental right is deeply rooted in American liberty and has been recognized and protected by the Supreme Court. " The priorities established in a General Plan should reflect careful consideration of the island's economy and how to best support our island economy but instead this prioritization of pedestrians `first' and `automobile' transport reflects an obsession with addressing carbon as a cause' for an alleged crisis for our climate. . It's strange to us that in this document that purports to be about a plan for `development' there is barely a focus on the actual economy. Here instead we see a document 'prioritizing' Pedestrian travel (on an island with very few densely populated urban centers) without context of what will actually promote agriculture, commerce, industries, jobs and economic activities. This directive would make more sense for an Oahu General Plan because of the size of the land mass and ratio of population. If it is in this document without Page 532 much explanation then it appears to be a reflection of a `fad' in transportation policy rather than a practical and well thought out policy directive. The minimum roadway width standards to accommodate the County Roadway Classifications were adopted in Resolution 779-20. The following provides an overview of this standard with reference to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Functional Classification system. 4.2.6 Transportation Terminals: Airports and Harbors As a major hub for tourism, commerce, and connectivity, Hawaii County recognizes the importance of effective planning and management of its airports and harbors. These key infrastructure components serve as lifelines that facilitate economic growth, enhance regional connectivity, and provide essential services for residents and visitors. Airports and harbors connect the County to the rest of the world, allowing for the efficient movement of goods, people, and ideas. They are essential nodes within the transportation network, acting as important economic drivers for the region. Efficient airports and harbors directly contribute to the success of various industries, including tourism, agriculture, trade, and logistics. Moreover, they are instrumental in supporting emergency response efforts, disaster management, and ensuring the overall resilience of the region's transportation system. Again, over and over the objection 'in general' to this General Plan 2045 is that the document references `economic growth' and yet does not address the actual drivers of the economy in detail. As public servants it is your best service to our island if you would study how you can support the farmers, producers of goods and services to build a great economy together. Unfortunately there are dozens of instances where legislators and public servants have imposed restrictions, fees and taxes on those very `drivers' of our economy. Airport Terminals and Harbors do not `cause' the economy to grow and are not drivers of the economy and yet we see a General Plan with weighted emphasis on `transportation' and urban development without seeing evidence of a study of what will actually support the individuals and households that produce economic value for our actual economy. This is an extremely poor outcome for a document that presents as a 'guide' for legislators and policy makers for the next 20 plus years. The principal concerns of planning for transportation terminals involve a comprehensive approach that addresses various aspects, including location, zoning of adjacent land, infrastructure development, capacity management, safety and security measures, environmental sustainability, integration with other modes of transportation, and financing and programming of improvements and services through capital improvement projects. While the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (DOT) is responsible for the actual design, construction, and operation of terminals and supporting facilities, the General Plan addresses Page 533 the location of these facilities in relation to the pattern of overall land uses. There are two deep draft harbors on the island, one in Hilo and another in Kawaihae. While improvements continue to be made, both harbor terminals lack adequate docking and Harbor has increased significantly as the population and development in West Hawaii continue to grow. In 2011, the Hawaii Commercial Harbors 2035 Master Plan was developed by the State to accommodate the future needs of facilities CONCERN: THE HARBORS SHOULD NOT BE CONTROLLED BY THE STATE OF HAWAII. THEY ARE HARBORS CRUCIAL TO THE ECONOMY OF OUR ISLAND AND WERE PREVIOUSLY UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE COUNTY. WHAT HAPPENED TO HOME RULE? WHERE WAS THE CONSULTATION OF THE PUBLIC WHEN DECISIONS WERE MADE TO HAND OVER CONTROL OF OUR HARBORS TO THE STATE ?. Air terminals that transportation are in Hilo, Waimea, `Upolu, and Kona. The terminals at Hilo and Kona are overseas facilities. Overseas flights at the Kona International Airport at Keahole will continue to increase with the growth of resort areas in Kona and Kohala. Overseas flights through Hilo International Airport have been important for agriculture in East Hawaii. What is concerning about this County General Plan 2045 is the lack of analysis about our actual economy. WHY DO WE SEE A DOCUMENT THAT STATES `OVERSEAS FLIGHTS WILL CONTINUE TO INCREASE WITH THE GROWTH OF RESORT AREAS?' THIS PLAN SEEMS FLAWED DUE TO LACKING IN CRITICAL ARGUMENTS' FOR THE PLANNED GROWTH BASED ON ACTUAL NUMBERS AND STUDIES . IF THERE ARE STUDIES AND STATISTICS THAT DO SUPPORT THE ASSERTIONS MADE MULTIPLE TIMES IN THE GENERAL PLAN ABOUT PROJECTED ECONOMIC GROWTH THEN THEY SHOULD BE REFERENCED AND INCLUDED IN THE PLAN. ALSO CITATIONS OF WHERE THIS INFORMATION WAS PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC IN `CONSULTATIONS' STRANGELY THE HILO PLAN IS MISSING FROM THE GENERAL PLAN DOCUMENT AND THIS IS ONE OF TWO URBAN CENTERS AND THE CENTER FROM WHICH TWO OF THE `HARBORS' AND `TERMINALS' OPERATE? THIS SEEMS (AGAIN) A GLARING OMISSION. Since 2011, the DOT has embarked on a $2.3 billion Hawaii Airports Modernization Program to improve the safety, capacity, and efficiency of our major passenger and cargo airports. As the population becomes more mobile and as resident and visitor populations increase, there will be a greater demand for new and expanded transportation facilities that are adjacent to compatible land uses and include alternative and active transportation connections to decrease the demand for cars and reliance on fossil fuels. OBJECTION TO THIS SENTENCE IS THAT IT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY FACTS OR AN ARGUMENT MADE FOR THE CASE BEING PRESENTED. AGAIN THE CONCERN ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT IS THAT IT IS Page 534 COMMITTING OUR ENTIRE COUNTY GOVERNMENT AND OUR LEGISLATURE TO A RADICAL COURSE OF ACTION BASED ON THE PREMISE THAT FOSSIL FUELS ARE TO BE ERADICATED AND THAT PERSONAL AUTOMOBILE TRANSPORTATION SHOULD ALSO BE ERADICATED AND OR COMPLETELY ELIMINATED. THESE PREMISES ARE PART OF A RADICAL SOCIALIST AGENDA THAT VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTION SINCE IT WILL UNDOUBTEDLY LIMIT THE FREEDOM OF UNITED STATES CITIZENS TO FREELY MOVE ABOUT. service inter-island 4. 2 Transportation Access and Mobility I County of Hawaii General Plan 122 Objective 24 Improve accessibility to airports, harbor systems, and support facilities. Policies 24.1 Encourage the programmed improvement of existing terminals, including adequate provisions for control of pollution and appropriate and adequate covered storage facilities for agricultural products. 24.2 The State Department of Transportation should continue to implement its plans for transportation terminals and related facilities to promote and follow desired land use policies. 24.3 Transportation terminals should be developed in conjunction with the different elements of the overall transportation system. 24.4 Encourage maximum use of the island's airport and harbor facilities. 24.5 Encourage the development, maintenance, and enhancement of Hilo and Kawaihae Harbors as detailed within the State's Hawaii Commercial Harbors 2035 Master Plan. THIS COULDN'T BE MORE VAGUE AS A STATED OBJECTIVE. IT DOESN'T REFERENCE THE VERY PRACTICAL MATTERS OF ECONOMIC DRIVERS AND OVERALL ECONOMIC HEALTH OF OUR ISLAND. WHERE IS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE ACTUAL ECONOMY IN THIS ENTIRE DOCUMENT ? THIS ALSO OMITS MENTION THAT A PROSPEROUS AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY WOULD BE THE RATIONALE FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE AT KAWAIHAII AND HILO HARBORS. AGAIN THERE IS AN OBJECTION TO HANDING OVER HARBORS TO THE STATE OF HAWAII WHERE THEY ARE CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE TO THE ISLAND . 24.6 Support the State's objectives to acquire rights within the runway clear-zones, limit heights within approach zones, and restrict noise-sensitive uses within designated noise contours determined by the State. CONCERN: THIS APPEARS TO REFERENCE PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND SUGGESTS THAT THE COUNTY SHOULD SUPPORT' THE STATE TO RESTRICT USES AND ACTIVITIES IN CERTAIN AREAS Page 535 NEAR TO AIRPORTS?' THIS AGAIN IS ONE MORE COMMUNIST LAND GRAB PRACTICE. THIS DOESN'T BELONG IN OUR COUNTY PLAN DOCUMENT FOR 2045. 24.7 Future land uses in the vicinity of airports and harbors should have an adequate open space buffer and/or be compatible with the anticipated noise exposure and industrial nature in the vicinity. 24.8 Encourage pedestrian-oriented connectivity around harbors and small boat harbors. 24.9 Encourage master planning of small boat harbors to accommodate commercial and recreational fishing, tour boats, as well as business and recreational ocean activities, that balance economic vitality and environmental sensitivity. CONCERN THERE HAS BEEN AN ONGOING ATTEMPT TO EXCLUDE MANY USERS FROM ACCESS TO HARBORS (SAILING COMMUNITY, FISHING COMMUNITY HAVE EXPERIENCED HIGHER USER FEES AND MORE RESTRICTIONS OF USE IN RECENT YEARS)AND MANY OF THE HARBORS IN THE STATE HAVE BECOME PRIVATIZED. (If privatization occurs, then management controls everything. .) . Actions 24.a Create a strategic improvement plan, including mapping, for County owned and/or managed boat harbors and develop an island-wide needs assessment to better serve regional gaps in ocean accesses. 24.b Ensure collaboration with State agencies to offer a variety of transportation options at airports and harbors. 4. 2 Transportation Access and Mobility I County of Hawaii General Plan 123 4.3 PUBLIC UTILITIES Page 536 4. 3 Public Utilities I County of Hawaii General Plan 124 4.3. 1 Introduction In Hawaii County's pursuit of a prosperous and resilient future, public utilities stand as pillars of essential infrastructure. THERE IS A LOFTY CLAIM MADE BY THIS ENTIRE EXERCISE TO SUGGEST THAT THE DOCUMENT ITSELF REPRESENTS ANY KIND OF PLAN FOR A PROSPEROUS AND RESILIENT FUTURE. THERE ARE MANY BUZZWORDS THAT ARE BEING USED IN THIS DOCUMENT THAT ARE HOLLOW. THESE WORDS THEMSELVES DON'T CONJURE UP A FUNCTIONING ECONOMY BUT THEY DO OFTEN GIVE PUBLIC SERVANTS THE WARM FEELING THAT THESE WORDS CAN 'DO ALL THE WORK.' THIS DOCUMENT IS LACKING IN A GROUNDING OF ACTUAL ECONOMIC STUDY AND LACKS THE INSIGHTS INTO THE OBVIOUS WAYS THAT COUNTY GOVERNMENT COULD SUPPORT THE AGRICULTURE AND TOURISM SECTOR AND ENCOURAGE NEW INDUSTRY ON THE ISLAND. These are services regulated by the government and provided in response to existing and prospective patterns of development. Changes in land use, population density, and development usually generate changes in the demand and supply of utilities. As the backbone of modern society, public utilities encompass a wide range of vital services that support the health, safety, and sustainability of our communities. This critical infrastructure allows us to function in many ways, including the ability to maintain healthy living conditions, proper sanitation, and access reliable energy to power our homes and businesses. Public utilities play a key role in forming the foundation upon which social, economic, and environmental progress is built. Such essential services enhance the quality of life for residents, visitors, and businesses while safeguarding the natural resources and cultural heritage of our island. The significance of public utilities can be understood through their contributions in the areas of environmental sustainability, economic prosperity, and social well-being. Public utilities drive environmental stewardship by promoting clean energy generation, efficient water management, waste reduction, and recycling initiatives. AS PART OF GENERAL PLANNING AND GOOD MANAGEMENT PRACTICE, WHY HAS THERE BEEN NO AUDIT OF THE WASTEWATER DIVISION OF THE WASTE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT? NO DOCUMENT PURPORTING TO PLAN AHEAD FOR 20 PLUS YEARS CAN COVER FOR THE FACT THAT MALADMINISTRATION AND POOR LEADERSHIP HAS LEAD TO MULTIPLE `FAILS' OF RAW SEWAGE TREATMENT WHERE LEAKS OCCURRED AND THE PUBLIC WASN'T ADEQUATELY INFORMED. THE PLAN SHOULD START WITH A MORE SERIOUS ASSESSMENT OF THE FAILURES OF THE CURRENT MANAGEMENT STRATEGY IN OUR WASTEWATER SYSTEM. Page 537 Through the application of sustainable practices and technologies, public utilities protect our fragile ecosystems, mitigate climate change impacts, and preserve the beauty of our island for future generations. HOW DO `PUBLIC UTILITIES' `MITIGATE' `CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ? This is an example of a wild overstatement and is not supported by fact. Additionally, robust and reliable infrastructure attracts investment, supports economic growth, and fosters job creation. From powering local industries to enabling efficient transportation networks, public utilities are catalysts for economic development, making our communities more resilient in the face of challenges. Waste to Energy incinerators have been opposed multiple times in the past in Hawaii County and each time a massive multi million dollar contract for construction of an incinerator was required which the public was going to be financing over many years. We notice that the Incinerator `Waste to Energy' proposal is in this County General Plan 2045 in spite of all the protests in the past. This history of pushing forward unpopular projects that have seen community objection and then forcing the property Access to safe and affordable utilities is a fundamental right of every individual. Really ?? Who wrote this ? As a general comment, it has been pointed out repeatedly that this General Plan' document is poorly written and has many flaws.Here we see misuse of the term fundamental rights' where there is no such `fundamental right.' While 'Safe and Affordable utilities' may be considered `essential' for a `standard of living' or to meet the definition of economic prosperity' but use of the phrase `fundamental right' is a confusion of what the legal understanding is concerning `fundamental rights.' The `fundamental rights' of say .. `freedom to move' ARE (as cited elsewhere in the transportation section) the rights that this document happily waives aside (ignoring the Constititution in the process) . Further, there should be statistics included about what proportion of the island currently is 'off grid' since that proportion is very high and those numbers would provide a necessary context for all discussion about proposals to provide utilities `affordably' AND `universally.' Public utilities ensure equitable distribution of resources, allowing residents of all socioeconomic backgrounds to enjoy necessities such as clean water, affordable energy, and accessible internet-based services. These services enhance public health, education, and overall quality of life, fostering thriving and inclusive communities. As with previous comment, this entire section seems flawed due to lacking in facts. This statement reflects `wishes' rather than a series of steps toward an attainable goal. Given the unique challenges posed by our geography and vulnerable ecosystem, the General Plan aims to effectively guide the development, maintenance, and improvement of these critical services. This section of the Plan is primarily concerned with the planning aspects of our, water, wastewater, stormwater, electricity, and telecommunications systems. Planning for the location of utility facilities such as reservoirs, pumping stations, and sewage treatment plants is an important aspect of the land planning process, as it makes way for development opportunities. Page 538 Where is the context for this statement? Here we see the notion of`development opportunities' being introduced without context or explanation. This is objectionable since it could be interpreted by future administrations or legislatures as a `mandate' for growth while lacking any parameters. Unintegrated utilities can burden developments with lower levels of service and may limit or even prevent development. The integration and availability of public utilities in priority growth areas are imperative. CONCERN: Why isn't this spelled out more ? Why is there no clear explanation here of what is meant by `priority growth area' . Changes in the intensity of land use greatly influence the quantitative design of utilities and services, particularly their design capacity. There may be distinctions in the type of services offered for each utility as land use intensities vary. These distinctions also depend on local codes and ordinances, health and sanitary considerations, and practices followed by utility companies. 4. 3 Public Utilities I County of Hawaii General Plan 125 Table 33: Public Utilities Challenges General Funding and financing the development, conversion, repair, operations, and maintenance of public utilities are central challenges for communities, developers, and county government. WHAT IS MISSING HERE IS REFERENCE TO THE IDEA THAT HOMEOWNERS WILL ALL BE ASKED TO PAY FOR CONVERSION FROM CESSPOOL/SEPTIC OVER TO ACTUAL COUNTY SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS TOPIC DESERVES A FULL DISCUSSION. DITTO WHAT IS CONCERNING IS THAT THE PUBLIC CAN BE REQUIRED TO PAY FOR DEVELOPMENT' OF PUBLIC UTILITIES.. Any large infrastructure expansions are paid for by developers and the costs are not to scale for financing. Geographical variability and obstacles require creative solutions for utility buildout. Aging public utility infrastructure must become more resilient to natural hazards, extreme weather events, and climate change impacts. WHERE ARE THE CITED STUDIES PROVING THAT CLIMATE CHANGE IS CAUSING WEATHER EVENTS/CLIMATE WEATHER ? IN THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT WE SEE NONE REFERENCED. Absent, aging, or dilapidated infrastructure limits new development where it is needed, consistent with strategic land use patterns and inhibits existing development. THIS SENTENCE IS POORLY WRITTEN WITH THE RESULT OF CONFUSING THE READER. WHY ARE WE LEFT WONDERING WHAT IS BEING SAID HERE? Outdated utility systems and practices can pose environmental and health concerns and are expensive to change. Page 539 Disputes over water source capacity can prevent development where it is needed and consistent with desired development patterns. Water commitments have been assigned to parcels that are not being developed or lack development potential. THIS NEEDS TO BE TAKEN OUT OR ELSE EXPLAINED SO THAT THE MEANING IS CLEAR. Guidelines for assigning water units per system need to be updated. Modeling of water demand and potential demand needs to be closely aligned to land use. •The water systems serving, North Kohala, South Kohala, North Kona, and Puna will require additional water source development. On-site wastewater disposal can adversely impact groundwater resources. THIS APPEARS TO BE A REFERENCE TO SEPTIC/CESS POOL SYSTEMS. ELABORATION AND A LOT MORE DETAIL SHOULD BE REQUIRED HERE. Wastewater planning and policy primarily focus on maintaining and servicing existing systems and do not proactively plan for developing new systems to accommodate growth or to extend existing lines to align with urban zoning. County policy has largely relied on private developers to develop commercial and private wastewater systems for new development, which ultimately leaves significant municipal service gaps in urban areas. Many County wastewater systems may not be able to accommodate unserved, existing zoned capacity and projected growth. Landowners and developers may incur the costs of constructing private systems or upgrades due to the insufficiency and lack of wastewater systems in many areas. Wastewater requirements hinder the redevelopment or rehabilitation of existing structures and are often seen as an affordable housing issue. Treated wastewater is typically discharged into ocean waters or injected into the ground and is not generally reused. Wastewater infrastructure improvement and development costs are not fiscally planned for, either in the County budget or through County wastewater fee valuation. Individual wastewater systems (IWS)are associated with limitations and regulations. Currently, the Department of Health's rules do not allow single-family dwellings and additional dwelling units (ADU) on a single IWS system. Reliance on IWS is an impediment to compact development due to minimum lot size requirements for IWS, thereby contributing to sprawl. Coastal residential neighborhoods without centralized wastewater are contaminating near- shore waters with pollution from IWS. ELABORATION AND A LOT MORE DETAIL SHOULD BE REQUIRED HERE. THIS SEEMS TO IMPLY A POLICY DIRECTIVE THAT IS SPECIFIC TO APPLY TO COASTAL NEIGHBORHOODS ? IMPOSING FINES OR HIGH COSTS TO HOME OWNERS TO ADDRESS A NEW REQUIREMENT FOR MAINS SEWER OR EVEN SEPTIC TANK INSTALLATION IN ROCKY TERRAIN WILL LEAD TO DELINQUENCY AND THEN FINES AND POTENTIAL SEIZURE OF PROPERTY. THIS IS A VERY`DANGEROUS' POLICY DIRECTIVE TO LEAVE AMBIGUOUS. THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS POLICY DIRECTIVE MUST BE EXPLORED AND CLEARLY STATED. Page 540 THIS DOCUMENT IS CITING THE HUGE OBSTACLES TO ADDRESSING THE PROBLEMS OF OUR ISLAND WHERE SO MANY HOUSEHOLDS RELY ON CESSPOOLS. WHILE THERE ARE EXAMPLES OF INNOVATIVE BIO-REMEDIATION METHODS AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO CONVENTIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT' NO STUDIES ARE INCLUDED, NO MENTION OF THESE KINDS OF OPTIONS ARE INCLUDED. BIO REMEDIATION WOULD MOST CERTAINLY BELONG IN A DOCUMENT LIKE THIS SINCE SUCH METHODS SHOULD BE EXPLORED AS A COST SAVING MEASURE AND DATA IS AVAILABLE TO DEMONSTRATE EFFECTIVENESS. FURTHER THE IMPACT TO COASTAL ECO SYSTEMS OF INADEQUATELY TREATED WASTEWATER AND RAW SEWAGE ARE WORTHY OF MENTION HERE IN THIS DOCUMENT. TO CITE A WELL KNOWN EXAMPLE: THE `GENKI BALL' EXPERIMENTS HAVE BEEN DONE IN SEVERAL POLUTED WATERWAYS IN HAWAII. MOST NOTABLY THE `GENKI BALLS' USED AT ALA WAI CANAL IN HONOLULU RESULTED IN BETTER WATER QUALITY AND FISH RETURNING TO THE AREA. WHERE A COMBINATION OF CULTURED 'BOKASHI' AND CLAY WERE INTRODUCED TO THE WATERWAYS THUS BILLIONS OF MICROBES WERE RELEASED CAPABLE OF REDUCING ECOLI AND OTHER LEVELS OF BACTERIA IN THE WATER. THIS AND OTHER KINDS OF BIOREMEDIATION BELONGS IN A PLANNING DOCUMENT FOR HAWAII ISLAND. PAGE 126 The looming deadline to convert cesspools to sewer or other IWS may create lack of local expertise to meet demand if not properly planned. The future impacts of climate change on future rainfall volumes are uncertain. WHERE IS THE FACTUAL EVIDENCE THAT THERE IS SUCH A THING AS 'MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE'? Outdated codes limit the effectiveness of stormwater infrastructure and stormwater-related practices. Water quality changes caused by non-point source pollution, human activities, erosion, and sediment transport can negatively impact environmental systems and processes. A lack of incentives and flexibility exists in the permitting process for stormwater and green infrastructure. There is a lack of a dedicated funding source for public systems. There is a heavy reliance on imported fossil fuels for power generation. The State of Hawaii has the highest electricity rates in the United States. Building codes, design perspectives, and construction practices can increase electrical demand. There is a constant need to update and renovate electrical systems and infrastructure. The adoption of renewable energy practices may offload environmental costs to other distant communities, which can offset positive climate action. POORLY WRITTEN , AMBIGUOUS GENERALIZING STATEMENTS LIKE THIS DO NOT BELONG IN A COUNTY GENERAL PLAN . WHAT EXACTLY IS MEANT BY THE TERM RENEWABLE ENERGY `PRACTICES?' WHAT ENVIRONMENT COSTS ARE REFERRED TO HERE? HOW ARE COSTS `OFFLOADED TO DISTANT COMMUNITIES' HOW ARE THESE OFFSETTING 'POSITIVE CLIMATE ACTION?' Page 541 Renewable energy developments can be controversial, such as geothermal and wind turbines. THIS STATEMENT IS OBJECTIONABLE. THE REASON THESE `ENERGY DEVELOPMENTS'ARE CONTROVERSIAL' IS THAT THEY HAVE INJURED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND ARE KNOWN TO CAUSE HARM. WE NOTE THAT NUCLEAR POWER WAS IN THE ORIGINAL FIRST DRAFT OF THIS DOCUMENT AND IS ALSO CONTROVERSIAL.IF MAKING A CASE FOR GEOTHERMAL OR WIND TURBINES (OR NUCLEAR ENERGY) OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTATION ACKNOWLEDGING THE RISKS SHOULD BE AFFORDED TO THE PUBLIC. Inadequate access disrupts efficiency and productivity and is a barrier to accessing public services and information. INADEQUATE ACCESS TO WHAT?THIS IS A POOR SENTENCE AND IS AMBIGUOUS IN MEANING. Last mile infrastructure is often the most costly and difficult segment to deploy, especially for rural areas where distances from a central distribution point are greater and population density doesn't economically promote the deployment. Consistent and accurate service data is needed to provide a constantly improving network for the island.THE STATEMENT `PROVIDING A CONSTANTLY`IMPROVING NETWORK' CAN BE INTERPRETED TO REFERENCE THE INCREASINGLY INTENSE LEVELS OF SIGNAL BEING ESTABLISHED. 5 G WHILE BRINGING HIGHER SPEED LEVELS OF DATA TRANSFER IS PROVING TO POSE A HEALTH RISK TO HUMAN TISSUE. THE REGULATION OF 5G TOWERS WITH CONSIDERATIONS FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY IS AN URGENT ISSUE. WE NOTE THAT THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING ZENDO KERN HAS RECENTLY RECOMMENDED GUIDELINES THAT WILL NOT STRINGENTLY ENFORCE SAFETY STANDARDS FOR THE COMMUNITY. Providers seeking to deploy broadband infrastructure face multiple layers of permitting and approvals at both the State and County level, in addition to community opposition regarding the installation of telecommunications towers. SEE ABOVE COMMENT. THIS REFLECTS AN INTENTIONAL DISREGARD FOR SAFETY CONCERNS THAT ARE WIDELY DOCUMENTED AND CURRENTLY THE SUBJECT OF LEGISLATION. Limited competition in broadband service providers and transpacific backhaul providers means high consumer rates due to a lack of competition within the market. (??? THIS IS JARGON THAT ISN'T EXPLAINED ) General Pursue creative funding and financing tools such as Community Facilities Districts (CFD) and Improvement Districts, for utility development, conversion, repair, operations, and maintenance. THIS NEEDS BETTER EXPLANATION. `CREATIVE FUNDING' IS AN OBJECTIONABLE TERM AND SOUNDS LIKE A PROCESS FOR SELLING OFF UTILITIES OR FINANCING CONSTRUCTION, REPAIRS OR MAINTENANCE SO EITHER WAY, THE PUBLIC WILL PAY MORE FOR UTILITIES. Ensure that utility development matches desirable development priorities. Streamline the process of utility infrastructure development to achieve the highest possible level of service for our communities. Lead the charge in resource conservation and assess creative solutions to incentivize Page 542 resource conservation for the public. Prioritize the conversion and modernization of outdated utility systems and practices. Use an integrated approach to value all water as a resource (e. g., drinking water, wastewater, stormwater). Collaborate with asset management(e.g., road resurfacing and utility upgrades). ASSET MANAGEMENT IS A VAGUE TERM THAT IS NOT SUFFICIENTLY DEFINED. Explore public-private partnership opportunities to create circular systems. ANOTHER VAGUE TERM THAT IS NOT SUFFICIENTLY DEFINED. PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS USUALLY IS ANOTHER WORD FOR INCREASING PUBLIC DEBT WHILE GIVING AWAY PUBLIC ASSETS TO PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. THIS IS MORE FROM THE PAGES OF SOCIALISM AND WE REJECT IT. Increase partnerships and enhance collaboration with government, private and nonprofit agencies, and other stakeholders. HERE `OTHER STAKEHOLDERS' IS A VAGUE TERM THAT IS NOT SUFFICIENTLY DEFINED. PLEASE DEFINE IT CLEARLY OR TAKE IT OUT ALTOGETHER. Explore innovative ways to fund water infrastructure improvements to attract development that is consistent with desired density and the land use pattern. AGAIN A REFERENCE TO `DESIRED DENSITY AND LAND USE PATTERNS' THIS HAS NOT BEEN SUFFICIENTLY EXAMINED IN THE PLANNING DOCUMENT AND IS BEING REFERENCE HERE AS A STANDARD Seek creative funding for significant expansion of water systems to reach new customers in non-service areas. Promote and practice water conservation practices to maximize efficient water use. Adopt One Water recommendations to standardize interagency collaboration in planning for and managing water resources. Rainfall collection can provide additional water capacity even where we have Department of Water Supply(DWS) systems. NEEDS CLEAR EXPLANATION. Align the Water Use Development Plan, Master Plan, General Plan, DWS Capital Improvements Program (CIP), DWS guidelines, DWS water commitments, and private improvements to the DWS system. NEEDS CLEAR EXPLANATION. Exercise some controls over the permitted uses within the defined zone of influence for downstream deep well sources. IN THIS GENERAL PLANNING DOCUMENT THERE APPEARS TO BE NO MENTION OF THE IMPACT OF MILITARY ON THE SOIL, WATER AND AIR QUALITY. HERE A REFERENCE TO POLLUTERS UPSTREAM OF WATER SOURCES AND YET MILITARY IS NOT MENTIONED? POHAKULOA MILITARY BASE CONTINUES TO LEASE FOR$1 AND CONDUCTS LIVE FIRE TRAINING DIRECTLY ABOVE THE ISLAND'S VAST AQUIFER. IT HAS BEEN A KNOWN FACT THAT DEPLETED URANIUM HAS BEEN SCATTERED ONTO THE BASE AND CONTINUES TO BE DISTURBED BY MILITARY ACTIVITIES UP THERE. Page 543 Encourage groundwater recharge from regional scale master planning to on-site best management practices such as low-impact development (LID). Increase opportunities for recycled water. THIS SHOULD BE ELABORATED SINCE IT APPEARS TO BE A DIRECTIVE. THE PUBLIC IS ENTITLED TO BE CONSULTED ON SUCH MATTERS. Prioritize sewer for sensitive urban areas. Proactively seek grant funding to assist with wastewater development. AGAIN STATING THAT REFERENCING OVER AND OVER THE NEED FOR `WASTEWATER DEVELOPMENT' WHILE DEDICATING NO TIME AND EFFORT TO EXPLORING ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF BIO REMEDIATION IS A MAJOR OMMISSION Advocate for expanding cesspool conversion tax credit to all cesspool conversions. THESE ARE MAJOR COSTS BEING PASSED ON TO HOME OWNERS. Explore opportunities for public-private partnerships as well as those for technology upgrades and innovation. THE TERM `PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP' IS A TERM ASSOCIATED WITH INCREASED DEBT FOR THE PUBLIC AND A REDUCTION (USUALLY) IN HARD ASSETS THAT ARE HANDED OVER TO CORPORATE PRIVATE INTERESTS. Promote the expanded use of greywater for landscape irrigation and groundwater recharge via rules for new construction and retrofits Advocate to the Department of Health (DOH)to adopt appropriately scaled requirements and standards and develop flexible guidelines for designing and permitting wastewater systems that meet environmental objectives. Low-pressure systems should be prioritized for retrofitting instead of gravity flow. •Higher-density development can contribute more to a centralized system. HERE AGAIN WE SEE AN ASSERTION THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE HIGHER DENSITY AND THIS LACKS PUBLIC DISCUSSION AND YET Drinking Water Wastewater 4. 3 Public Utilities I County of Hawai`i General Plan 128 Stormwater Electricity & Energy Telecommunications & Broadband Increase availability and access to information about private wastewater treatment plant capacities or expansion opportunities. Prioritize resiliency measures that support climate change impact scenarios. Regularly amend County codes to be as current and innovative as possible. Page 544 Be a leader in prioritizing green infrastructure over gray infrastructure. Ensure that stormwater infrastructure decisions align with related plans and the CIP budget. Green infrastructure practices may provide opportunities for creating or expanding industry. Prioritize the use of native plants in landscaping. Promote and support the development of alternative energy production facilities. Be a net power producer with hydrogen and waste management. THIS STATEMENT WARRANTS ELABORATION OR IT DOESN'T BELONG IN THIS DOCUMENT. Hawai`i Island has the highest renewable energy percentage in the State and can continue to support renewable energy projects to decarbonize our energy system and stabilize electricity costs. WHAT DOES `DECARBONIZE OUR ENERGY SYSTEM'ACTUALLY MEAN ? ELECTRIC CARS ON THE ISLAND ARE CHARGED AT STATIONS THAT RELY ON POWER FROM DIESEL FUEL GENERATORS. IN OTHER WORDS ELECTRIC CARS REMAIN DEPENDENT ON THOSE FOSSIL FUELS BUT WE SEE OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT PROMOTING ELECTRIC CARS AS PART OF AN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY STRATEGY. THE NOTION OF `DECARBONIZING OUR ENERGY SYSTEM' IS FEEDING A MYTH ABOUT HOW RAPIDLY'WE' CAN TRANSFORM OUR ENTIRE ECONOMY AND OUR WAY OF LIFE. THE IDEA OF `DECARBONIZING' THE ENERGY SYSTEM IS VERY VERY RADICAL AND IS COMING FROM A SOCIALIST MYTH THAT CARBON (THE BUILDING BLOCK OF LIFE) IS 'BAD' AND THAT SOMEHOW`CARBON' IS THE CAUSE OF WEATHER EVENTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE.' THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT SUPPORTS A RADICAL AGENDA TO DECARBONIZE' OUR ENTIRE ENERGY SYSTEM. FURTHER, SINCE THIS WILL REQUIRE COMPLETE DISRUPTION TO THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM AND SINCE IT IS IMPLIED THAT PEOPLE WILL BE DISCOURAGED FROM MOVING ABOUT `FREELY' THIS IS A RADICAL OVERHAUL OF OUR ECONOMY WHICH IS LIKELY TO PRODUCE MANY PAINFUL SHOCKS TO INDIVIDUALS, OHANA AND COMMUNITIES. THIS IS ABOUT THE CLEAREST EXAMPLE OF `RECKLESS'ADMINISTRATION OF GOVERNMENT THAT ONE COULD POSSIBLY IMAGINE. WHAT IS EXTREMELY DISTURBING ABOUT SEEING THE COUNTY DOCUMENT LINE UP SO CLOSELY WITH DECLARED GOALS OF AN ELITE INSTITUTION REPRESENTING THE WEALTHIEST 1% OF OUR PLANET(THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM') IS THAT THIS ORGANIZATION APPOINTED ITSELF AS THE CUSTODIANS AND ARBITERS OF A PLAN TO BRING IN THE 4TH INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION WHICH IS THE MOST RADICAL OF ALL THE TRANSITIONS AT ANY TIME IN HISTORY AND BROUGHT ABOUT THROUGH A SERIES OF CRISES: PANDEMIC DISEASE, CLIMATE EVENTS' THAT APPEAR AS A CRISIS AND ALSO FOOD SHORTAGES IN PART CAUSED BY INTERFERENCE WITH SUPPLY CHAIN THAT BEGAN WITH LOCKDOWNS IN 2020. THE CATCH PHRASE BY WEF LEADER KLAUS SCHWAB AT THE TIME OF INTRODUCING THE GREAT RESET' WAS 'BY 2030 YOU WILL OWN NOTHING AND YOU WILL BE HAPPY.' WE SPECIFICALLY OBJECT TO TERMS SUCH AS `DECARBONIZING OUR ENERGY SYSTEM' BECAUSE THIS IMPLIES THAT YOU HAVE THE CONSENT OF THE PUBLIC A)TO ASSERT THAT CARBON IS A PROBLEM AS IF THERE IS CONSENSUS ON THIS TOPIC WHEN THERE IS NOT Page 545 AND B) TO TAKE EXTREMELY RADICAL AND DANGEROUS STEPS TO TRANSITION THE ENTIRE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM AWAY FROM FOSSIL FUELS IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. Support the County's Broadband Initiative and coordination with the State to facilitate digital equity efforts e.g., establishing broadband as a public utility, infrastructure deployment, providing training support, and coordinating funding strategies for broadband and telecommunication services). AFTER 5G THERE IS 6G COMING . WITH EACH OF THE INCREMENTAL INCREASES IN THE INTENSITY OF THE FREQUENCY ILLNESSES AND TISSUE DAMAGE RESULTS CONSISTENT WITH `RADIATION POISONING' . THERE NEEDS TO BE A COMMITMENT TO REVIEW SAFETY INFORMATION AND TO TAKE AN APPROACH THAT HAS A PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE. THIS IS THE MINIMUM STANDARD OF GOOD GOVERNMENT. Compact development and higher population densities where appropriate are favorable for commercial service providers as they contribute to more economically viable market conditions. WHICH COMMERCIAL SERVICE PROVIDERS' IS THIS REFERENCING ? THIS STATEMENT NEEDS TO BE EXPLAINED BETTER OR ELSE REMOVED FROM THIS SECTION. Providing consistent and accurate digital literacy data will promote a desirable level of service for all residents. WHAT IS DIGITAL LITERACY DATA AND HOW WILL THIS PROMOTE A DESIREABLE LEVEL OF SERVICE ? IS 'DIGITAL LITERACY DATA' A CLASS OF INFORMATION THAT COMES WITH VIGILANT PROTECTION OF EACH AND EVERY INDIVIDUAL; THEIR PRIVACY AND THEIR 1ST AMENDMENT RIGHTS ?WITHOUT PROTECTION OF THIS KIND, IF OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT IS WAIVING ON THE INVASIVE DATA COLLECTION PRACTICES OF THE DIGITAL INDUSTRY, THEN IT MAY BE ENDANGERING THE PEOPLE OF THIS ISLAND. WE ARE REQUESTING THAT THE PRIMACY OF SAFETY AND DATA PRIVACY ABOVE THE INTERESTS OF INVESTORS AND SERVICE PROVIDERS ARE WRITTEN INTO THIS GENERAL PLAN. THERE ISA LOT OF DATA TO SUPPORT THAT WHEN THE SAFETY AND PRIVACY OF INDIVIDUALS ARE COMPROMISED, THE PUBLIC WILL BE ENDANGERED AND TYRANNY WILL LIKELY RESULT. THESE ARE THE REASONS THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT IS FLAWED: WE DON'T SEE CARE TAKEN BY OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT TO PROTECT INDIVIDUALS' HEALTH AND SAFETY. . Increasing digital inclusion efforts, which focus on ensuring both access to and ability to use a range of technologies, will contribute to better outcomes for health, public safety, economic opportunity, and civic participation. THE TERM `digital inclusion' IS BASED ON AN ASSUMPTION THAT MORE ACCESS TO 5G AND HIGHER BANDWIDTH IS A POSITIVE THING. THIS PREMISE IS WIDELY PROMOTED IN THIS POLICY DOCUMENT AND YET NO SAFETY STUDIES ARE CITED. Streamlining permitting and approval processes will improve the efficiency of broadband and telecommunication development and delivery. THIS IS AMBIGUOUS AND MAY BE PROMOTION OF A LOOSE SET OF GUIDELINES FOR TOWER PLACEMENT THAT IS NOT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST. Pursue partnerships to develop public spaces with broadband access. THIS IS AMBIGUOUS AND MAY BE PROMOTION OF AN OBJECTIVE THAT IS NOT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST. 4.3 Public Utilities I County of Hawaii General Plan 129 Page 546 4.3.2 Public Utilities Goal, Objective, Policies, and Actions Our communities are adequately served by sustainable and efficient public infrastructure, utilities, and services based on existing and future growth needs, sound design principles, and effective maintenance practices. Objective 25 Improve the efficiency, reliability, and sustainability of essential infrastructure systems. Policies 25.1 Public utility facilities shall be designed at a scale that meets the needs of future development. IN THIS DOCUMENT SO FAR, THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT AN ACTUAL FOCUS ON THE ECONOMY, ON THE SECTORS OF THE ECONOMY THAT REQUIRE SUPPORT, HAS ACTUALLY BEEN CONSIDERED. WHY IS THERE AN EMPHASIS ON `FUTURE DEVELOPMENT' WITHOUT THE MAIN FOCUS BEING ECONOMIC GROWTH? 25.2 Provide utilities and service facilities that minimize total cost to the public and effectively serve the needs of the community. 25.3 Utility facilities shall be designed to complement adjacent land uses and minimize pollution or disturbance of the natural environment and natural resources. 25.4 Improvement of existing utility services shall be encouraged to meet the needs of users. THIS IS MEANINGLESS. WHY IS THIS SENTENCE NECESSARY ? 25.5 Encourage the clustering of developments to reduce the cost of providing utilities. WE ARE FAMILIAR WITH THIS IDEOLOGY. IT'S NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT IT NEEDS TO BE NAMED FOR WHAT IT IT: `SMART CITY' PROPAGANDA. STACK EM AND PACK EM HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS ARE A PART OF THE PLAN AND THIS IS A RADICAL COMMUNIST AGENDA THAT WE REJECT. IT IS THROUGHOUT THIS DOCUMENT WHICH IS EXTREMELY CONCERNING. THE SMART CITIES THAT ARE BEING DESIGNED GLOBALLY ARE ANOTHER REFLECTION OF WEF STATED GOALS TO CREATE URBAN CENTERS WHERE SURVEILLANCE AND CARBON MONITORING FORM THE JUSTIFICATION FOR CONFINING PEOPLE AND PREVENTING THEM FROM MOVING ABOUT FREELY. THIS IS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AND TRAITOROUS PROPOSAL TO FIND IN A DOCUMENT THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE DELIVERING TO OUR ISLAND A PLAN FOR OUR WELL BEING AS A COMMUNITY, FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH, AND FOR THE CARE OF OUR `AINA. 25.6 Develop short- and long-range capital improvements programs and plans for public utilities within its jurisdiction that are consistent with the General Plan. Page 547 25.7 Maintain an Asset Management Program aimed at utilizing maintenance plans to prolong the life of our utilities as well as reduce whole-life costs. Actions 25.a Develop and adopt an Impact Fees Ordinance to aide in the expansion of public utilities. 4. 3 Public Utilities I County of Hawai`i General Plan 130 4.3.3 Drinking Water Conservation The Hawaii State Constitution provides that all public natural resources, including water, are held in trust by the State for the benefit of the people. The State Constitution further maintains that "the State has an obligation to protect, control, and regulate the use of Hawaii's water resources for the benefit of its people." Water availability is crucial to any type of development, whether urban, rural, or agricultural. Water availability is based on the sustainable yields of the groundwater hydrologic units established through the State Water Code., Land use allocation must be closely related to water availability, including the quantity and quality of the water, and the adequacy of the transmission and distribution system. The General Plan requires an understanding of water availability and capacity, current demands, and future demands based on planned and anticipated future growth and land uses. The County's Department of Water Supply (DWS) is the primary agency that manages, controls, and operates the water supplies of the County and its properties. There are 23 individual water systems distributed throughout the island. Water demand is directly related to population and industry usage and is expressed as gallons per day (gpd) or million gallons per day (mgd). Demand does not represent domestic consumption alone, but also includes all agricultural, industrial, and commercial uses, fire protection, and other uses. In some areas, however, non-domestic users are likely to create the major demand, and careful attention must therefore be given in any study of probable future water needs. In Hawaii, there are a multitude of public agencies that are either actively tasked with regulating water resources or whose policies affect water use. There are also a number of private entities that use and manage water resources. Over the decades, water management has become segregated in a way that has created disjointed, mechanical approaches to a naturally continuous resource. The disconnection has included narrow perspectives that fail to see the larger picture. Hawaii County aspires to achieve water resource management that is free from the limitations and issues of siloed practices, processes, agencies, and government bodies. Achieving a One Water approach in Hawaii County includes actionable steps that can be adapted and adjusted to localize the One Water strategies. Page 548 QUESTION : WHY IS A PRIVATE COMPANY BEING SOLD THE RIGHTS TO BOTTLE WATER IN HILO ? WHY ISN'T A PLANNING DOCUMENT CONCERNED WITH FUTURE WATER ACCESS CLEAR THAT NO WATER IS TO BE `SOLD' OR COMMERCIALIZED SINCE IT BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE OF HAWAII? One Water One Water is a strategy that integrates the management of stormwater, wastewater, groundwater, sea water, freshwater, graywater, and recycled water to create resource and financial efficiencies. One Water will help the County of Hawaii address climate change impacts by creating cross-agency coordination and advancing the capacity within agencies. ANY PREMISE USED TO CONTROL WATER ACCESS, WATER RIGHTS WHETHER BY A CORPORATION OR A GOVERNMENT MUST BE REJECTED. WATER IS AN INCREASINGLY PRIVATISED COMMODITY ACROSS THE WORLD. THIS SHOULD CONCERN US. IT ALREADY SEEMS EXTREMELY CONCERNING THAT ON THE ONE HAND APPLICANTS HAVE REPEATEDLY ATTEMPTED VIA A COUNTY PERMITTING PROCESS TO PURCHASE THE RIGHTS TO BOTTLE WATER FROM OUR MAUNA KEA AQUIFER AND ON THE OTHER HAND THAT THE COUNTY WOULD BE PROMOTING CONTROL OF WATER MANAGEMENT IN A CENTRALIZED FASHION INVOLVING MULTIPLE `UNDISCLOSED AGENCIES' FURTHER, AGAIN THERE IS AN OBJECTION TO THE SUGGESTION THAT THE COUNTY OF HAWAII WILL ADDRESS `CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS' WHEN THE VERY PREMISE OF CLIMATE CHANGE HAS BEEN CHALLENGED BY MULTIPLE LEADING AUTHORITIES AND IS THE SOURCE OF CONTROVERSY DUE TO THE LACK OF HARD EVIDENCE THAT CARBON' IS THE CAUSE OF `CLIMATE CHANGE' AND `CLIMATE EVENTS' THAT APPEAR TO REPRESENT AN EMERGENCY. Objective 26 Increase the protection of existing and potential sources of drinking water. Policies 26.1 All public water systems shall be designed and built to the DWS dedication standards. All other systems shall meet all relevant health and safety regulations and be designed and constructed by a licensed engineer. 26.2 Water sources shall be protected to prevent depletion and contamination from natural and man- made occurrences or events. Page 549 26.3 An effort by County, State, and private interests shall be coordinated to identify sources of additional water supply to be implemented and ensure the development of sufficient quantities of water for existing and future needs of high-growth areas and agricultural production. 26.4 Installation or rehabilitation of water distributions shall be sized to adequately meet fire protection. 26.5 Ensure the highest quality of water is reserved for the most valuable end-use. 26.6 Encourage the design of large development projects (200+ units) in the North Kohala, South Kohala, North Kona, South Kona, and Ka'u Districts to be as water neutral as reasonably possible through water conservation, recharge, and reuse measures to reduce the water footprint. 26.7 Promote best practices in sustainable water collection and use for private water systems. 26.8 Water system improvements, including exploratory wells, shall correlate with the County's desired land use development pattern. 26.9 The DWS shall prioritize infill development and focus source development to serve designated Urban Growth Areas. 26.10 Waterdemandprojectionsshallincludeallconsumptiveandnon-consumptivedemands. 26.11 TheDWSandthePlanningDepartmentshallcoordinateprioritiesbeforetheadoptionofanynew water development or County land use plans. 26.12 AllCountypotablewatersystemsshouldhavebackupstandbysources. One Water 26.13 Treat all water as a valuable resource in community design, and integrate designs for drinking water, stormwater, and recreational water needs. CONCERN: AN EXAMPLE OF YET MORE POORLY EXPRESSED LANGUAGE THAT SEEMS INAPPROPRIATE. WHAT IS MEANT BY `RECREATIONAL WATER NEEDS?' 26.14 Managewater,stormwater,andwastewaterasthesamenaturalresourceincollaborationwithth e DWS, DEM, DPW, and DOH. 26.15 New developments should be designed to reduce water demand, retain runoff, decrease flooding, and recharge groundwater. 26.16 Supportlocalized,small-scalesolutionstowaterreuseandon-sitesystems. Actions 26.a In collaboration with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), conduct further research on localized rainfall modeling to accurately assess future precipitation trends. Page 550 4. 3 Public Utilities I County of Hawaii General Plan 132 26.b Expand water conservation programs, primarily aimed at reducing demand, such as leak detection, and rebates for low flow. 26.c Evaluate and amend the fee schedule for water use to take into account high water use and aquifer recharge projections. Use the funds generated to pay for conservation measures and infrastructure. 26.d Improve County water conservation practices to lead by example. 26.e Maintain the water master plan to consider water yield, present and future demand, alternative sources of water, guidelines, and policies for the issuing of water commitments. 26.f Collaborate with the DOH to develop standards and/or guidelines for the construction and use of rainwater catchment systems to minimize the intrusion of any chemical and microbiological contaminants. 26.g Promote the use of groundwater sources to meet DOH water quality standards. 26.h Seek state and federal funds to assist in financing projects to bring the County into compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act. 26.i Explore the feasibility of incentive methods such as property tax deductions, conservation easements, or transfer of development rights to protect the defined zone of influence of existing or proposed public and private wells. AGAIN THIS SEEMS TO REFER VAGUELY TO THE PRIVATISATION OF WATER AND CONVERSELY TO PROPERTY ACQUISITION WHICH IS NOT CURRENTLY CONSIDERED THE RESPONSIBILITY OF OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT. UNDER A COMMUNIST GOVERNMENTAL SYSTEM ONE COULD EASILY EXPECT THAT A GOVERNMENT WOULD BE CRAFTING POLICY IN SUCH A WAY THAT TRANSFER OF PROPERTY FROM PRIVATE LANDOWNER TO GOVERNMENT WOULD BE FACILITATED. 26.j Investigate alternative financing options for expanding water systems to support infill growth consistent with the County's desired land use development pattern. AGAIN THIS IS A VAGUE REFERENCE WHEN THAT SHOULD NOT BE LEFT AMBIGUOUS AND THIS IS CONCERNING BECAUSE IT COMPROMISES THE VALUE OF THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT. 26.k Collaborate with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to develop, improve, and expand agricultural water systems in appropriate areas on the island. 26.1 Continue to participate in the United States Geological Survey (USGS) exploratory well drilling program. 26.m Expand programs to provide agricultural irrigation water. One Water 26.n Develop water conservation and stormwater management guidelines for commercial, industrial, and residential properties. 26.o Codify the administrative structure needed to develop a water resource program and interdepartmental collaboration framework. Page 551 26.p Collaborate with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders to develop and facilitate community partnerships between upstream and downstream communities. 26.q Develop public-private partnerships to leverage funding sources. 4. 3 Public Utilities I County of Hawai`i General Plan 133 Table 35: Water System Standards Domestic Consumption Guidelines Zoning Designation Residential: Single-Family or Duplex Multi-Family Commercial Resort Light Industry Schools and Parks Agriculture Average Daily Demand 400 gals/unit 400 gals/unit 3000 gals/acre 400 gals/unit or 17,000 gal/acre 4000 gals/acre 4000 gals/acre or 60 gals/student 3400 gals/acre 4. 3 Public Utilities I County of Hawai`i General Plan 134 4.3.4 Wastewater Treatment and Reuse The General Plan recognizes the significance of wastewater treatment and reuse as essential components of the County's comprehensive water management strategy. Adequate sewer systems are vital to maintain public health and protect the environment. As communities generate wastewater through various sources such as residential, commercial, and industrial activities, effective treatment is necessary to remove harmful pollutants and contaminants before the water is discharged back into the environment. Improperly treated wastewater can have detrimental effects on marine ecosystems, coastal waters, and freshwater resources, jeopardizing both human and ecological health. Page 552 An adequate system minimizes contamination of both the groundwater supply and coastal waters, beaches, and waterborne recreational areas and is not a visual and odor nuisance. Land development plans for resort-residential complexes located in shoreline areas pose a potential water quality problem for adjacent near-shore waters. Adequate treatment facilities are essential prerequisites for development. HERE IN THIS DOCUMENT WITH NO REFERENCE TO BIO REMEDIATION AND WITH THE SHEER VOLUME OF HOUSEHOLDS OPERATING OFF GRID, THIS DOCUMENT IS CREATING 'CRIME' OUT OF REGULAR HOUSEHOLD OPERATIONS. THE FACT THAT THIS COUNTY ADMINISTRATION IS PROPOSING A POLICY DIRECTIVE TO MANDATE/ FORCE HOUSEHOLDS TO ADDRESS THE LACK OF INFRASTRUCTURE ON OUR RURAL ISLAND IS A VERY RECKLESS DIRECTION TO TAKE. REFER PREVIOUS COMMENTS 1) AN AUDIT SHOULD BE DONE OF THE CURRENT WASTEWATER DIVISION 2)ALTERNATIVE BIOREMEDIATION METHODS MUST BE INVESTIGATED AND FINDINGS PUBLISHED. MORE PUBLIC DISCUSSION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS IS NEEDED BEFORE THIS POLICY DIRECTIVE WOULD BE ADOPTED SINCE IT WILL LIKELY BRING GREAT FINANCIAL STRAIN TO MANY HOUSEHOLDS AND REQUIRE ONEROUS LEVELS OF `ENFORCEMENT.' Wastewater reuse, also known as water recycling or reclaimed water, involves treating wastewater to a level suitable for non-potable uses. Reusing treated wastewater provides an opportunity to conserve precious freshwater resources and reduce the strain on existing water supplies. For Hawaii Island, where freshwater resources are limited and vulnerable to climate change impacts, the implementation of wastewater reuse projects becomes vital for ensuring water sustainability. By implementing appropriate treatment processes, treated wastewater can be used for a range of purposes, including irrigation of agricultural lands, landscape irrigation, industrial processes, and groundwater recharge. This practice helps meet non-drinking water needs, reducing the reliance on freshwater sources for non-potable purposes and leaving more available for essential uses like drinking water. THERE IS NO MENTION HERE OF THE SAFETY CONCERNS THAT MUST ACCOMPANY SUCH USES OF TREATED WASTEWATER. The County operates municipal sewerage in Hilo, Papa`ikou, Kapehu, Pepe`ekeo, Honoka'a, Kealakehe, and Kaloko. The remaining communities are served by private wastewater treatment facilities or individual facilities, such as cesspools or septic tanks. In 2017, the Hawaii State Legislature passed Act 125, mandating that all Hawai'i's cesspools be replaced by 2050. Cesspools are substandard sewage disposal systems as they do not treat wastewater. According to the latest report on the Hawaii Cesspool Hazard Assessment and Prioritization Tool, Hawaii Island contains an estimated 48,596 cesspools. Sewerage disposal system designs must be examined with the particular region in mind. Of critical importance in an examination of sewerage disposal for a community is the cost of the system, including construction and operation costs. These costs vary with the characteristics of each area. The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 legislated the protection of all aquifers or portions of aquifers currently serving as drinking water sources and any other aquifer capable of yielding Page 553 consumable water. This mandate was based on a national concern for the quality of the groundwater and the increasing evidence of contamination of this valuable resource. In 1976, the State Legislature enacted Act 84, relating to safe drinking water, which requires the State Department of Health (DOH) to establish an underground injection control program to protect the quality of the State's underground sources of drinking water. Because of the importance ofgroundwater as a source of municipal water supplies, the underground injection control program is considered a beneficial approach in the identification of aquifers that should be protected from subsurface disposal of wastewater through injection wells. HERE AGAIN THERE IS NO MENTION OF THE PRIMARY POLLUTER OF THE AQUIFER : THE MILITARY BASE ON POHAKULOA. THERE IS ALSO NO MENTION OF TESTING WATER QUALITY AND TESTING FOR CONTAMINANTS. THIS IS ANOTHER DIVISION OF OUR COUNTY THAT SHOULD BE AUDITED. WHY IS NOTHING DONE ABOUT A MILITARY POTENTIAL `SUPER FUND SITE' OPERATING ABOVE A PRISTINE AQUIFER? The protection of these aquifers is established by designating areas currently being used or will be used in the future for drinking water supply. The Underground Sources of Drinking Water USDW)will be protected from pollution by prohibiting the construction of new injection wells that may pollute the USDW. Injection wells are allowed in exempted areas. The boundary lines between the USDW and the exempted areas have been developed. ** PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION OR ELSE TAKE OUT THIS EXEMPTION REFERENCE. THE PUBLIC SHOULD BE BETTER INFORMED UPON READING THIS PLAN, NOT LEFT IN THE DARK TO WONDER . Under Chapter 62, Wastewater Systems, the DOH adopted a 1,000-foot setback of wastewater systems from all public drinking water wells and springs. In compliance with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Public Law 92- 500), the DOH and the County jointly prepared the Water Quality Management Plan for Hawaii County in 1978 and subsequently updated the plan in 1980. In 1979, the County Council adopted the plan through a resolution to serve as the planning guide for the development of regional waste treatment systems and the control of non- point sources of pollution. To implement the management plan, the County has prepared facility plans for various areas on the island. Facility plans are developed by the County to satisfy a requirement for the application of loans from the State to develop wastewater treatment facilities. The facility plans identify problems, potential solutions, and costs. In 1985, the State Legislature enacted Act 282, Relating to Environmental Quality, which reassigns the County, effective July 1, 1987, or upon receipt of State funds, to assume complete administration and implementation for the regulation of sewerage and wastewater treatment system programs. Source: Hawaii News Now(2022). 4.3 Public Utilities I County of Hawaii General Plan 136 Page 554 Objective 27 Planned and developed municipal sewer capacity is expanded to serve our Urban Growth Areas and reduce sewage-related impacts on water quality. Policies 27.1 A Sewerage Study for All Urban Areas, including appropriate water quality management strategies, shall be completed and used as guides for the general planning of sewerage disposal systems. 27.2 Private treatment systems shall be installed by land developers for major resorts and other developments along shorelines and sensitive higher inland areas, except where connection to nearby treatment facilities is feasible and compatible with the County's long-range plans, and in conformance with State and County requirements. 27.3 Immediate steps shall be taken to designate treatment plant sites, sewerage pump station sites, and sewer easements according to the facility plans to facilitate their acquisition. 27.4 The County shall obtain State and Federal funds to finance the construction of proposed sewer systems and improve existing systems. 27.5 Plans for wastewater reclamation and reuse for irrigation and biosolids composting remaining solids from the treatment of wastewater are processed into a reusable organic material) shall be utilized where topographically feasible and needed for landscaping, agricultural purposes, or fire protection. Wastewater and Environmental Quality Prioritization 27.6 Pollution shall be prevented, abated, and controlled at levels that will protect and preserve public health and well-being through the enforcement of appropriate Federal, State, and County standards. 27.7 Ensure municipal wastewater systems serve designated Urban Growth Areas UGA) with the capacity to accommodate projected population growth. 27.8 The Department of Environmental Management and the Planning Department shall coordinate priorities before the adoption of any new wastewater development or land use plans. 27.9 Prioritize developing a multipronged approach to wastewater infrastructure funding, including proactively seeking grant funding for wastewater system expansion, improvements, and new development. 27.10 Ensurewastewaterfeesreflectactualcostsforservice,maintenance,andfutureimprovements. 27.11 Ensure that wastewater systems and improvements are designed and functioning to maximize system efficiencies, prevent accidental leaks or spills, and provide sanitary, reliable wastewater treatment that is not negatively impacting natural resources. One Water-Recycled Water Expansion Page 555 27.12 Striveforanintegratedapproachtostormwaterandwastewater,andwaterresourcemanageme nt that is comprehensive and as efficient as possible. 27.13 Encourageon-sitewaterreusesolutionsforlargedevelopments. 4. 3 Public Utilities I County of Hawaii General Plan 137 27.14 Encourageandincentivizethecollectionofrainfallfornon-potableuse. 27.15 PrioritizetheuseofgraywaterinareasconnectedtoCountywaterandnotconnectedtoCounty wastewater. Actions Wastewater and Environmental Quality Prioritization 27.a Prioritize areas where on-site wastewater treatment should be converted to sewer and establish financial tools such as improvement districts to aid in implementation. 27.b Prioritize areas where wastewater treatment facilities are necessary to facilitate future growth and utilize financing tools such as community facilities district (CFD) or tax increment financing (TIF) to aid in implementation. 27.c Review, assess, and amend Codes relating to sewer connection requirements to ensure wastewater issues and requirements are addressed in a consistent, sustainable, and socially equitable way. 27.d Develop a wastewater master plan with a clear prioritization method for wastewater system expansions and improvements based on criteria involving land use, projected growth, social equity, and environmental factors. 27.e Develop plans to improve, connect, or develop new wastewater systems in unsewered urban coastal communities. 27.f Perform a study to assess individual wastewater systems (IWS) in unsewered urban growth areas to assess the rate of failures/negative impacts, determine rates of large capacity cesspools still in use, and develop plans to improve, connect, or develop new wastewater systems for unsewered urban communities. 27.g Proactively seek opportunities for public-private partnerships for wastewater collection and treatment development. 27.h Facilitate the use of infrastructure improvement districts and other types of localized funding mechanisms to fund improvements. 27.i Streamline the sewer connection loan program. 27.j Develop wastewater cost valuation in service fees (similar to the water model fee structure). 27.k Develop a criteria-based infrastructure prioritization tool to develop new or expand existing municipal wastewater systems. Base these priority areas on designated urban growth boundaries, urban zoning and density, population trends and anticipated growth, health/safety, and environmental factors. 27.1 Implement innovative wastewater systems at a cost-effective scale for small communities. Page 556 27.m Amend the County Code, Section 21-26-1(a) requiring "all sewer extensions shall be approved by resolution of the County council" to read, "all sewer extensions outside of Urban Growth Areas shall be approved by resolution of the County council." REFERRING AGAIN TO CONCERNS THAT THIS IS AN UNFEASIBLE COST TO REGULAR HOUSEHOLDS. THIS IS A VERY CONCERNING POLICY DIRECTIVE AND AS ACKNOWLEDGED HERE, MORE STUDIES WOULD BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO ADMINISTERING SUCH POLICIES.. SO WHY ARE WE SEEING THIS EMPHASIS IN THE GENERAL PLAN ? 4. 3 Public Utilities I County of Hawaii General Plan 138 27.n In collaboration with the DOH Wastewater Branch, reevaluate and clarify the requirements set forth in Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), Section 11-62-31.1(a) (1) B) and amend County sewer requirements accordingly to accommodate needed housing units. 27.o Collaborate with the DOH to advance progressive wastewater technology and regulations. One Water-Recycled Water Expansion 27.p In collaboration with the Department of Agriculture, develop a water resource strategy for efficient agricultural water use and reuse. 27.q Install non-potable systems, such as reclaimed wastewater, brackish groundwater, and untreated surface water in proximity to priority UGAs for non-potable water uses. 27.r Conduct supply and demand studies to determine a level of service for non-potable water needs. 27.s Facilitate greywater reuse systems through code amendments and through partnering with DOH for regulatory changes and incentives. 4. 3 Public Utilities I County of Hawai`i General Plan 139 4.3.5 Stormwater Infiltration and Green Infrastructure Stormwater management and the implementation of green infrastructure are critical elements of the General Plan for their vital role in sustainability on Hawaii Island. As an island ecosystem with limited freshwater resources and vulnerable coastal areas, managing stormwater effectively and integrating green infrastructure practices are essential for preserving our water resources and ensuring environmental sustainability. Page 557 Stormwater refers to the runoff from precipitation that flows over land surfaces, eventually entering water bodies such as streams, rivers, and oceans. Stormwater is a crucial element of the island's overall water landscape. While precipitation may be an obvious contributor to stormwater, all the phases of the hydrologic cycle are related to stormwater and are influenced by public utility decisions made in the built environment. Precipitation and surface runoff are often the phases of the hydrologic cycle that people recognize as stormwater, whereas evaporation, transpiration, and condensation are not as easily observed processes. Uncontrolled stormwater runoff can lead to various detrimental effects on water resources and ecosystems. Polluted runoff, also known as nonpoint source pollution, from agriculture, urban development, forestry, recreational boating, marinas, and hydromodification activities is the leading cause of water pollution in waters across the country and in Hawaii. Uncontrolled stormwater runoff can also lead to localized flooding, causing damage to infrastructure, property, and even loss of life. Implementing stormwater management strategies helps to control the flow of stormwater, reducing the risk of flooding and associated hazards. Moreover, excessive stormwater runoff can cause soil erosion, leading to the loss of fertile topsoil, sedimentation in water bodies, and degradation of natural habitats. Proper stormwater management practices, including erosion control measures, help minimize erosion and preserve the island's natural resources. Stormwater is a prime example of the unavoidable connections that exist between the built environment and the natural environment. Increasing the opportunities for infiltration and transpiration can reduce the amount of evaporation that surface runoff requires. The social, environmental, and economic impacts of stormwater infrastructure have meaningful implications for our overall island sustainability as water is one of the most precious resources. Point and Nonpoint Source Pollution Engineering efficiency in conveying stormwater runoff using impervious surfaces (e.g., paved swales, channelized streams) must be balanced against environmental considerations. If the drainage is directed to streams, excessive freshwater volumes and sediment loads may impact coastal water resources (e.g., degrade water quality and smother coral reefs). If the drainage is directed to injection wells, more studies are needed to determine the impact of storm runoff on groundwater quality. Sediment basins, wetlands, or less impervious methods of conveyance e.g., grass swales) should be considered where feasible to reduce nonpoint source pollution of the coastal waters from stormwater runoff and filter infiltrating water. Green infrastructure refers to the network of natural or engineered features that manage stormwater while providing additional benefits to the environment and community. Such features may include rain gardens, permeable pavement, bioswales, and vegetated buffers. Green infrastructure is crucial for stormwater management, as it captures and absorbs runoff, reducing the volume and rate of runoff. By mimicking natural hydrological processes like sediment filtration and bioremediation, it helps to recharge groundwater, replenish streams, and 4. 3 Public Utilities I County of Hawai`i General Plan 140 Page 558 reduce stress on our water resources during periods of heavy rainfall. CONCERN: HERE AT LEAST WE SEE REFERENCES TO BIOREMEDIATION. WHY IS THIS ACCEPTABLE' AS A STRATEGY WHERE TREATMENT OF WATER RUN OFF IS CONCERNED BUT NEVER ENTERTAINED IN THE MATTER OF RAW SEWAGE TREATMENT (A 'SOLUTION' AND POLICY DIRECTIVE HERE WHICH THREATENS TO BE COST PROHIBITIVE TO MANY HOUSEHOLDS? ) By retaining and infiltrating stormwater, green infrastructure reduces the reliance on freshwater sources for irrigation, thus conserving water resources. This is particularly important for our island communities where freshwater availability is limited. Green infrastructure features may also provide habitats for native plants and wildlife. They contribute to biodiversity conservation and help restore and enhance Hawaii Island's natural ecosystems. Green infrastructure plays a key part in mitigating the impacts of climate change by reducing the urban heat island effect, moderating temperatures, and increasing resilience to extreme weather events. These measures align with the County's sustainability goals and efforts to adapt to climate change. 4. 3 Public Utilities I County of Hawaii General Plan 141 Page 166 34.15 Encourage the expansion of digital access and equity through the resilient buildout of broadband infrastructure and facilities. Does this take into account the safety of 5G+? Is this to facilitate surveillance of citizens in the future? Pagel 67 34.a Implement a Safe Route to School (SR2S) program for all schools. Will surveillance be implemented to ensure safety? Pagel 69 4.4. 6 Recreation Housing developers should not bear a disproportionate burden, or be forced to contribute more than their fair share, as inequitable requirements could deter needed housing development. This proviso seems to favor developers. Page171 35.a Provide funding for planning and acquisition,if necessary, of key corridor segments after corridor-zone plans are adopted. Does this preclude the rezoning and acquisition of private property? Page 559 35.k Maintain an on-going program of identification, designation, and acquisition of areas with existing or potential recreational resources, such as land with sandy beaches and other prime areas for shoreline recreation in collaboration with government, private and non profit agencies, and other stakeholders. Please include private property owners in your definition of stakeholders. Page 175 4.4.7 Encouraging the establishment of farmers' markets, community gardens, and a range of agricultural activities can promote local food production and improve access to fresh nutritious food. Please include home gardens. Page 177 36.g Support the distribution of telehealth support services, particularly to unserved and underserved communities. Encourage instead person to person contact. 36.j Amend the County Code to designate a lead agency for coordinating and responding to outbreaks of life-threatening, highly communicable diseases pursuant to the DOH direction. While ensuring the statues of the Nuremberg Code are observed. Page 179 4. 5.1 Blueprint for the creation of a 15 minute island, clustering us together in "a centralized, higher-density urban infill, supported by nearby, accessible public and private services and facilities." Page 181 Under Housing Challenges Targets: "Homeownership for investment purposes that are kept vacant or used for transient accommodation rentals reduces available stock for long term resident ownership and rental opportunities." Prohibits and discourages the rights of private ownership. Page 182 37.6 Vacant lands in the urban growth boundary (UBG) should be prioritized for residential and supportive uses before additional agricultural lands outside the UBG are converted into urban uses. Page 560 With the consent of property owner should be included. Pagel 83 38.1 Enable data-driven research to support and maintain a housing inventory program that monitors existing housing. 38.a Perform existing housing inventory data analysis to identify structural conditions and needs for rehabilitation or demotion. Both justify the necessity of more surveillance of the community. 38.a also precludes the private property owner's rights and opinions. Take this out or revise. Page 184 39.5 Allow for and apply property tax and land use regulations to incentivize private property owners to provide affordable housing units in mix-use and urban areas and to discentivize the land banking of unimproved properties. In other words land use regulations and property tax hikes will be weaponized against the private property owner. TAke this out or revise! Pagel 85 Table 40: Additional Infrastructure - Provide adequate broadband without invading people's privacy. Ensuring future surveillance capabilities? Pagel 88 40.8 Require all County Departments to collaborate with the County Office of Sustainability, Climate, Equity, and Resilience (OSCER) as the lead agency to ensure the integration of the County's goals of sustainability, climate resilience, and equity into all county operations and planning initiatives. To whom does OSCER answer? Who's watching the watchdog? THIS ORGANIZATION WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2023. IT WAS PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC AS AN AGENCY THAT COULD ACCEPT GRANT FUNDS FROM GOVERNMENT AND NON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS. Page 561 IT WAS NEVER SUPPOSED TO BE GRANTED EXTRA POWERS AS AN ADMIINISTRATIVE ARM OF THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT. WE SPECIFICALLY OBJECT TO THE LANGUAGE REQUIRING' `ALL COUNTY DEPARTMENTS' TO COLLABORATE WITH THE OSCER. THE COUNTY'S `GOALS'OF sustainability, climate resilience, and equity HAVE NOT BEEN ADEQUATELY DEBATED IN OUR COMMUNITY . WE CHALLENGE THE SUGGESTION THAT THERE IS CONSENSUS ON THIS MATTER AND WE SPECIFICALLY CHALLENGE THE OSCER 'AGENCY' TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF THE ABOVE. WE SPECIFICALLY CHALLENGE THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND THE LEGISLATURE TO STAGE A FULL PUBLIC REVIEW OF BOTH SETS OF DATA AND BOTH ARGUMENTS THAT THERE IS A CLIMATE CRISIS CAUSED BY CARBON THE `Office of Sustainability, Climate, Equity, and Resilience (OSCER)' BEGINS WITH A FLAWED AND DISPUTED PREMISE THAT THERE IS A CLIMATE 'CRISIS' AND THAT THE OTHER 3 'PILLARS' OF THE ORGANIZATION (SUSTAINABILITY, EQUITY AND RESILLIENCE) BELONG TOGETHER AS PART OF A 'SOLUTION.' WHAT IS FLAWED ABOUT THE BUZZ WORD 'SUSTAINABILITY' IS THAT THIS WORD LEADS THE IDENTICAL AGENDAS OF CONTROLLING LAND USE, WATER RIGHTS, ACCESS TO PUBLIC SPACE, THE RIGHT TO TRAVEL, FARMING AND PASTURING OF ANIMALS AND FOOD SECURITY. THESE BUZZWORDS ARE COMING FROM WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM AND THE UNITED NATIONS. ALL OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS PLUS THE BILL AND MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION AND 'NET ZERO' PROMOTE A DANGEROUS AGENDA OF OVERRIDING SOVEREIGN HOME RULE LOCAL COUNTIES AND STATES AND REPLACING WITH 'GLOBAL AGENDAS' WHICH ARE BRINGING IN COMMUNIST' VALUES AND SYSTEMS OF PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND DESTRUCTION OF SMALL BUSINESS AND THE CORPORATIZATION OF PUBLIC ASSETS. WHAT IS FLAWED ABOUT THE BUZZ WORD 'EQUITY' IS THAT IT IS QUICKLY BECOMING A WAY OF WAVING ON A COMMUNIST STYLE OF ADMINISTRATION OF GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESS WHICH PROMOTES LARGER PORTION OF THE POPULATION BEING ON WELFARE AND DIVERSITY HIRE PRACTICES THAT PROMOTE MEDIOCRITY AND NOT MERITOCRACY. THE WORD 'RESILIENCE' ALSO HAS COME TO BE ANOTHER 'BUZZ WORD' THAT IS A RATIONALE FOR THE CATCH PHRASE 'BUILD BACK BETTER' AND THE IDEA THAT MORE RIGOROUS BUILDING CODES, MORE RESTRICTIONS AND MORE BUILDING COSTS AND INSURANCE COSTS WILL FOLLOW IN THE AFTERMATH OF EACH 'DISASTER.' Page 562 ELSEWHERE IN THIS DOCUMENT THERE WAS A CHALLENGE TO THE PREMISE THAT THE RECENT FIRE IN LAHAINA WAS `NORMAL' AND THAT THE RESULTING LOCKDOWNS AND FAILURE OF GREEN ADMINISTRATION TO SUPPORT HOUSEHOLDS TO REBUILD ARE ALSO `NORMAL.' TO THE CONTRARY, WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IN LAHAINA FOR THE PAST 13 MONTHS EXEMPLIFIES THE WAY THAT THE WORD `RESILIENCE' HAS COME TO MEAN `CONTROL OF A POPULATION AFTER A DISASTER TO THE POINT THAT MANY WILL BE DISPLACED AND WILL BE FORCED TO LEAVE THE AREA, FINDING NO WAY TO REBUILD AND RESTORE THEIR LIVES AND LIVELIHOOODS.' Pagel94 Resulting in Longer Commutes: There are notable mismatches between locations of high population and job centers. Further justification for clustering in population centers. Further policy directive to justify curtailing personal independent transportation options. This again is objectionable and shows contempt for a fundamental constitutional right and as such has no place in a policy document published by this County Administration. Page 196 Table 43:Economic Opportunities / General Increase broadband infrastructure to provide opportunities for participation in the digital economy while allowing for other economic alternatives. CBDC's here we come! Page 206 46.i Partner with government, private and non profit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders for carrying capacity studies of fisheries and the establishment of State community-based subsistence fishing areas. More restrictions on fishing rights. Oddly in 5.3 Agriculture and Food Systems there is no mention at all of hunting and gathering. Page 210 Wahi Pana Need assurances our wahi pana and other natural assets will be protected from commodification and collateralization. Page 563 Page 213 49.1 [Encourage the] [i]ntegrat[ion] [of] 'aina- place-based values 49.2 [Encourage] the accessibility 49.3 [Promote] a visitor industry 49.5 [Encourage] regenerative tourism efforts 49.6 [Foster] initiatives and improve[d] efforts 49.h and farmers, homeowners, and other residents to develop and support place-based educational programs COMMENT: FINALLY HERE IS A DIRECTIVE THAT SPEAKS TO SUPPORTING THE EXISTING ECONOMY AND THE PEOPLE WHO ALREADY LIVE ON THIS ISLAND. THE FACT THAT THIS IS SHOWING UP ON PAGE 214 SHOULD BE CONCERNING TO ANYONE UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUPPOSED TO GUIDE THE PRIORITIES OF OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT AND LEGISLATURE. THE OPENING SECTION OF THE DOCUMENT SHOULD BE ABOUT SUPPORTING THE EXISTING CULTURE AND ECONOMY OF THE ISLAND. THE CAPACITY TO SUPPORT AND HELP GROW IN THIS AREA WOULD BE ALL Page 215 6.1 para 2 presenting [residents a true voice] for the future of Hawaii Island. 1 [where citizens collaborate with the County to effect change consistent with plans developed under this chapter.] 3 Ensure consistency among the General Plan and respective regional plans [What are regional plans?] 4 set forth in the General Plan's [Should this be plural or possessive?] 5 Establish an implementation system that is based on county-wide, regional, and agency levels What are regional and agency levels?] Page 216 Top para by promoting [economic] growth, 2nd para collaboration among various [residents] Key areas of focus include fostering [understanding of the role of government in] ensuring community engagement and input, securing funding, and coordinating priorities. Page217 6. 2.1 Page 564 Para 1 Community Development Plan Framework During the General Plan Comprehensive Review process, existing community plans were used to guide the CDP framework. From the adoption of the Kona, Puna, North and South Kohala CDPs in 2008, Kau CDP in 2017, and Hamakua CDP in 2018, there has been much to learn and grow from as we look to the future. The General Plan also benefited from years of collective participation in CDP implementation efforts through regional committees that implement their respective CDP. [NOTE: Hilo was not included in this CFP framework. Although there had been Hilo meetings in the past that dealt with some issues contained in the General Plan, no mechanism was put in place that paralleled the multi-year single-purpose work that was undertaken in the other six districts.] Para 2 To build on these lessons learned, future CDPs[, which it is hoped will include a CDP for Hilo,] shall be drafted The purpose of a CDP is threefold: 3. Provide a process for citizens to engage in civic dialogue [through open-forum townhalls where vigorous question-answer format is primary, eliciting the priorities of the community.] Page 218 6. Social Capital and Community Network Mapping During the process of reviewing a Community Development Plan, instances where community needs are not met may be identified. Examples of this may include a need for community gathering spaces such as parks or recreation hubs. Community Development Plans may identify such needs and outline a plan of action for community members and other [Hawaii Island residents] to coordinate efforts, combine and collect resources, and connect public and private sector agents to advocate for such enhancements to their community. [In the case of Hilo, where a CDP was never initiated by the Planning Department, an examination of why this was neglected must be addressed, for the purpose of getting input from this district even though the General Plan may have been already implemented. This could be accomplished through addendums to the General Plan at future dates.] Page 224 6.4.3 Para 1 The General Plan is a comprehensive framework designed to guide [innovative] development patterns, [and provide assistance toward] future opportunities and public investments. Para 3 The tables are intended to provide a clear and concise reference for agencies, policymakers, communities, farmers, homeowners, and other residents Page 225 Table 45 Page 565 Climate change, carbon footprint, net zero,GHG emissions, green infrastructure projects, climate adaptation The above terms, taken from Table 45, derive from the United Nations Agenda 21 Sustainable Development, inaugurated in 1992 at the United Nations Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. Residents of Hawaii Island have never had the opportunity to engage in discussions in every town, using every venue, to discuss the entire subject of climate change. It is a foundational subject, as it is the substrate upon which so much of the General Plan is predicated. It is un-Democratic to simply take ideas from other places and cement them into the plans we make for our own people, our own land, our own island, without engaging in an unhurried, full-blown examination of this agenda, neighbor with neighbor. Until such time as this takes place, we must place this draft of a General Plan on hold. Table 46 Objectives 13. Increase the use of Smart Growth principles to focus development within designated urban centers. As above, SMART is an acronym taken from the World Economic Forum that pertains to Internet-Of-Things technology. Its purpose is linkage of devices for the purpose of control and monitoring. No island-wide discussion has taken place as to the merits of SMART GROWTH. Again, it is a concept from far away, irreversible once implemented, without so much as a real attempt to inform residents. How can a General Plan proceed on concepts alien to the people? Table 47 21. [Engineer infrastructure] to reduce stormwater runoff. Page 227 Table 48 25. Improve the efficiency and reliability, and sustainability of essential infrastructure systems. 28. Increase green infrastructure practices. Example Indicators Annual funding allocated for [efficient] infrastructure initiatives Percentage of new development projects including [efficient] infrastructure elements Table 49 Our communities are adequately served by sustainable and efficient public infrastructure P232 6.4.4 1.a Seek [procedure] to support wetland identification and assessments. 1.j Identify partners and [S]upport a public awareness and education campaign to elevate recognition of the value of urban trees as essential infrastructure. 3.b Create special (business) improvement districts to engage in environmental research, restoration and maintenance, natural resource management, climate change or sea level rise Page 566 adaptation or other purposes to improve environmental conditions and provide community benefit. 4. a [Seek Hawaii Island residents and groups] to maintain and steward the preservation of sites, buildings, objects, and landscapes of significant cultural and historical importance. 4.c Support the identification of Heritage Landscapes, Corridors, Areas, and Centers. Heritage designation is UNESCO. It is crucial that Hawaii Island maintain control of its lands and natural resources, free of encumbrances of global organizations 4.h [Foment discussion among] government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders farmers, homeowners, and other residents 4.i private and nonprofit agencies, communities, and other stakeholders farmers, homeowners, and other residents Table 54: Climate Change Delete Table 54: Climate Change has not been debated across Hawaii County in a systematic way. Such a debate would entail townhall presentations by each side, allowing all the time necessary to absorb the decades of information circulating through media and academia. At some later time, these information-gathering events could then be followed by public open debates. Hawaii Island residents at that juncture would then be ready to decide whether they wished to premise all future growth on the notion of Climate Change, or reject it as unscientific.] 240 Table 56 Transportation Access and Mobility 20.e Adopt a Complete Streets ordinance. [Complete Streets derives from Agenda 21's SMART Cities designation. It has nothing to do with residents of Hawaii Island, until such time as they can be apprised of the overall design of Agenda 21, as it entails constricting traffic, expanding bike lanes and bus routes, installing islands - many changes that may or may not be workable. Hilo and Kona have very different requirements, and a cookie-cutter approach levels differences. Just because it is recommended by a national or international association does not mean it is suitable here. Again, it must be thoroughly discussed across the island before a decision can be made.] 22.a Amend the County Code to incorporate Vision Zero safety principles and Complete Street design principles. [Vision Zero, as stated above with Complete Streets, is an internationally utilized approach to pedestrian safety that first needs a full discussion here to see to what extent it is workable, if at all.] 243-255 27.d social equity, [No relevance to this category] 27.g Proactively seek opportunities for [strategies] for wastewater collection and treatment development. Page 567 28.c Update the DPW Storm Drainage Standards to reflect current data and to incorporate strategies and standards of green infrastructure and low impact development. 28.f Create a green infrastructure dedication standard. 28.1 Identify County parks and recreation, rights-of-way, and other County owned sites for green infrastructure demonstration projects 29.a Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities, farmers, homeowners, and other residents for the research and development of alternative/renewable energy resources. 30.d Collaborate with government, private and nonprofit agencies, communities and other Hawaii Island residents] 30.i [Encourage private] funding for broadband initiatives and deployments. 30.m Foster [private investments] to support the development and expansion of broadband infrastructure, 32.c Review county lighting and landscaping ordinances to implement CPTED. OPTED is a component of a SMART City that watches, listens, announces, tracks, records. It is a creation of Agenda 21 and the WEF and the UN. It must be rejected by the residents of Hawaii Island unless/until it is thoroughly discussed and debated. 32.p This point to be deleted In light of the controversy in the aftermath of the Lahaina fire, to be formulating a redevelopment plan, IN ADVANCE of an incident, creates a climate of distrust and anger. This subject must be handled very carefully in discussions with groups and individuals across the island.] 35.c Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, farmers, homeowners, and other 35.d Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies, farmers, homeowners, and other residents 35.i government, private and nonprofit agencies, farmers, homeowners, and other residents 35.k private and nonprofit agencies, farmers, homeowners, and other residents Page 568 36.d communities, and other farmers, homeowners, and other residents 36.f communities, and other farmers, homeowners, and other residents Page 254 45.k Partner with government (e.g., DOT, DBEDT, etc.), private and nonprofit agencies, communities, farmers, homeowners, and other residents to monitor 45.1 Partner with government, private and nonprofit agencies (e.g., business associations, realtors, chambers of commerce, etc.), communities, farmers, homeowners, and other residents 45.m expand the research and development industry for [innovative] economic development. 46.i private and nonprofit agencies, communities, farmers, homeowners, and other residents Page 569